On Monday 06 June 2005 10:37, Mario Lang wrote:
> Heh, thats a Redmond argument I'd say :-).
> There is nothing wrong (ok, not that much) with accidentally
> wasting CPU time, but if you are aware of where are you
> wasting it, I dont buy the argument that it is OK to leave it like that
> :-).
Actually, it's an *engineering* argument. Technology design is full of
situations where getting the last 5% of a given possible performance can end
up costing 500% more than getting the original 95% did. This is called the
'law of diminishing returns'. The principle is much, *much* wider than just
computer application design.
> And, even start up time counts, I find programs that need a long
> time to start anoying, and LONG is a very subjective number :-).
I would too, although I personally don't know that I'd call 3/4 sec a LONG
time to initialize a GUI application. The point I was trying to make is that
tradeoffs are part of the very warp and woof of the design process, and it's
impossible to develop anything efficiently without taking due cognizance of
that fact. Given the choice between spending a day adding a significant new
feature to an application or spending the same amount of time reducing that
application's start-up delay from 3/4 to 1/4 sec, I'll go for the first
option every time. Remember, *coding time* is your ultimate resource as a
programmer -- you want to invest it where you'll get you the biggest bang for
the buck.
Cheers!
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. | Director of Broadcast Software Development |
| | Salem Radio Labs |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Nothing ever becomes real till it is experienced -- even a proverb is |
| no proverb to you till your life has illustrated it. |
| -- John Keats |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Received on Mon Jun 6 20:15:09 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jun 06 2005 - 20:15:09 EEST