8 Nov
2022
8 Nov
'22
2:11 a.m.
On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 12:52 PM Warner Losh <imp(a)bsdimp.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 2:34 PM Charles H Sauer
(he/him) <sauer(a)technologists.com> wrote:
Well, if I ever go to work for Twitter, I know how I'm initializing
large arrays.
On 10/11/2022 3:14 PM, Michael Kjörling wrote:
Speaking of "just stupid"
Word on the street is that Elon Musk stack ranked the engineers by lines of code
over the last year (source: https://ma.nu/blog/bye-twitter) and layed off the bottom
performers in terms of LoC... On 11 Oct 2022 13:10 -0700, from lm(a)mcvoy.com
(Larry McVoy):
It was likely true that some parts of IBM put heavy emphasis on LOC, but
as Marc points out, that wasn't true in Research. I don't remember heavy
LOC emphasis in AIX groups, and I suspect even in Boca (OS/2) there was
not "heavy" emphasis. > Isn't it relatively well established,
though, that IBM culture at
> least for a very long time put heavy emphasis on counting lines of
> source code, and that more SLOC was considered to be better?
That's just stupid.
You're getting no argument from me there. Not 100% sure this is legit, since some tweets about
it have been deleted.
I suspect it was slightly more nuanced, having more to do with "total output"
measured as some combination of number of changes and their total size.
It sure is dumb, though.
- Dan C.