| ▲ | mrandish 4 hours ago | |
> "A caveat: Lines of code is an imperfect measure" I'm pleased they at least included this. However, they address the caveat by 'rounding down' the estimated multiple of the gain. I'm not sure that is the correct adjustment, especially once we understand the range isn't limited to positive numbers. There's strong evidence the range of code productivity denominated in "lines of code" should include negative numbers, especially in the highest-quality sphere. Perhaps the earliest and most legendary example: https://www.folklore.org/Negative_2000_Lines_Of_Code.html | ||
| ▲ | gregdeon 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
Yep, this is exactly what I thought of too... If you believe negative lines of code is the goal, then they've gotten 8x _worse_! | ||
| ▲ | Quekid5 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
AFAIK, the only correlation with LoC that's got solid evidence is this: the number of bugs correlates with LoC. | ||
| ▲ | 2f2 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Lmao I bloody love that. | ||