Stupid title. Compares new lines of code, active developers, and new
projects – Ruby vs. PHP vs. Python vs. Perl:
http://ohloh.net/wiki/articles/php_eats_rails
Mildly interesting, I guess…
RoR’s project page:
http://ohloh.net/projects/34
Joe
_Kevin wrote:
So somehow one person has managed to do the work of 4-5 coders in a
single year. Do you suspect that might be because he drinks too much
coffee or because he uses Ruby?
Both? 
Joe
On Oct 21, 5:50 pm, Joe R. MUDCRAP-CE
[email protected] wrote:
–
Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Actually, here are a few interesting points from the RoR project page.
- DHH seems to have written (or at least checked in) about 65% of the
code himself. - Ohloh estimates that RoR should require about 18 man-years of effort
to reproduce
So lets be conservative here and assume that DHH is responsible for 50%
of the effort on rails.
This means he personally has generated 9 man-years worth of code in the
two years since the repository was created.
So somehow one person has managed to do the work of 4-5 coders in a
single year. Do you suspect that might be because he drinks too much
coffee or because he uses Ruby?
Note: Even if these numbers are off by a bit, he’s been very productive
compared to whatever standard they are using for determining how many
LOC can be produced in one man-year.
_Kevin
Remember DHH is an “Alien of Extraordinary Ability” as far as the US is
concerned 
http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000522.html
On 10/21/06, _Kevin [email protected] wrote:
So somehow one person has managed to do the work of 4-5 coders in a
–
Thanks,
-Steve
http://www.stevelongdo.com
What a funny comparison.
It sort of like saying, almost everyone likes pop music, so you should
like pop music too, and we don’t need those other types of music.
Thats not a good test, LOC… we all know it takes 10 lines of PHP for
1 Ruby line :-P. Seriously though, I had to edit a PHP application
recently, REALLY REALLY simple app. Could have been done with 2
controllers, 2 models, and about 6 Views, probably taking under 100
lines of Ruby. The application… was over 3500 LOC (the PHP code
only, no HTML), no joke.
Joe R. MUDCRAP-CE wrote:
Stupid title. Compares new lines of code, active developers, and new
projects – Ruby vs. PHP vs. Python vs. Perl:http://ohloh.net/wiki/articles/php_eats_rails
Mildly interesting, I guess…
RoR’s project page:
The Ruby on Rails Open Source Project on Open Hub
I always wonder about these things. Using the same kind of metrics
(let’s pretend it would have been possible) in the mid-1980s, you could
have said “BASIC Eats C for Breakfast”.
It wouldn’t have had any more meaning, though.
–Al Evans
There was another thread about this article here the other day:
http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/85405
I think Michael H. summed it up best: “Looking at all three graphs
together you can say that a relatively steady percentage of rails
developers is producing a disproportionate number of new projects in a
relatively programmer-efficient language, while a fluctuating percentage
of PHP developers are contributing more and more code to fewer projects
over time.”
i just started learning RoR since august, even though i still am having
trouble understanding some concepts, i feel that i can churn out
multiple websites in such a short amount of time. i remember spending a
whole semester writing a web app as my senior design project. basically
it was written in perl and mysql that was a car database site, sort of
like autotrader. well now i can duplicate that site in a few days. thats
awesome!
On 10/21/06, Joe R. MUDCRAP-CE [email protected]
wrote:
Stupid title. Compares new lines of code, active developers, and new
projects – Ruby vs. PHP vs. Python vs. Perl:http://ohloh.net/wiki/articles/php_eats_rails
Mildly interesting, I guess…
RoR’s project page:
The Ruby on Rails Open Source Project on Open Hub
It’s just a title designed to gain attention. When I skimmed the
article, I saw it contend that there are more PHP programmers and more
PHP code than Ruby programmers and code. Wow…there’s some
groundbreaking research. back to work
Chris G. wrote:
–
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
That’s exactly my idea. What this shows is just the opposite “Rails
eats PHP’s breakfast, lunch and dinner.” The old viewpoint is that the
project is important, or complex, or (choose your adjective here)
depending on the number of lines of code. In reality, this hasn’t been
a very good comparison for at least 15 or 20 years. The old 4GLs did
away with this comparison. I suspect it started with assembly or COBOL
and never grew past that.
The number of new projects in Ruby (Rails?) is exploding even though
the number of lines is not. To me this is the important graph. Who
cares about how many hours (and cups of coffee) you’ve put in? What I
care about is how good is the result, and how quickly can I create it.
So, rather than looking at this report as a downer, I see it as an
old-timer who just can’t understand this new fangled music. And, btw,
I’m an old-timer too. I just don’t want to work as hard as I have in
the past and that’s what has brought me to Ruby and Rails.
Phil Mickelson
Adding more fuel to the fire, I recalled that someone had run
sloloccount on Rails a long time ago and it produced surprising
results. Here is a run on edge:
Total Physical Source Lines of Code (SLOC) = 62,274
Development Effort Estimate, Person-Years (Person-Months) = 15.31
(183.75)
(Basic COCOMO model, Person-Months = 2.4 * (KSLOC1.05))
Schedule Estimate, Years (Months) = 1.51 (18.13)
(Basic COCOMO model, Months = 2.5 * (person-months0.38))
Estimated Average Number of Developers (Effort/Schedule) = 10.14
Total Estimated Cost to Develop = $ 2,068,539
(average salary = $56,286/year, overhead = 2.40).
SLOCCount, Copyright © 2001-2004 David A. Wheeler
SLOCCount is Open Source Software/Free Software, licensed under the
GNU GPL.
SLOCCount comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, and you are welcome to
redistribute it under certain conditions as specified by the GNU GPL
license;
see the documentation for details.
Please credit this data as “generated using David A. Wheeler’s
‘SLOCCount’.”
Compared to a PHP framework I created
Total Physical Source Lines of Code (SLOC) = 41,755
Development Effort Estimate, Person-Years (Person-Months) = 10.06
(120.77)
(Basic COCOMO model, Person-Months = 2.4 * (KSLOC1.05))
Schedule Estimate, Years (Months) = 1.29 (15.46)
(Basic COCOMO model, Months = 2.5 * (person-months0.38))
Estimated Average Number of Developers (Effort/Schedule) = 7.81
Total Estimated Cost to Develop = $ 1,359,520
(average salary = $56,286/year, overhead = 2.40).
SLOCCount, Copyright © 2001-2004 David A. Wheeler
SLOCCount is Open Source Software/Free Software, licensed under the
GNU GPL.
SLOCCount comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, and you are welcome to
redistribute it under certain conditions as specified by the GNU GPL
license;
see the documentation for details.
Please credit this data as “generated using David A. Wheeler’s
‘SLOCCount’.”
I know what my framework does and it doesn’t do half what Rails does.
One inference is that by COCOMO estimates, which are relatively well
thought of, two somewhat similar projects show that Rails appears to
defy the statistics. It is important to emphasize that fact: Ruby and
Rails do not fit metrics based on LOC and it’s somewhat dubious
whether the other projects I’ve measured fit well either.
Does anyone use this tool and can anyone illuminate this interpretation?
On 23 Oct 2006, at 00:34, Pat M. wrote:
RoR’s project page:
The Ruby on Rails Open Source Project on Open HubIt’s just a title designed to gain attention. When I skimmed the
article, I saw it contend that there are more PHP programmers and more
PHP code than Ruby programmers and code. Wow…there’s some
groundbreaking research. back to work
From my blog round-up of odd links knocking around yesterday:
"… this article is getting some digg love right now, thanks to its
contentious title. Unfortunately the stats it quotes are completely
ridiculous.
The main claim is that 5 times more lines of code are being
contributed in open source projects in PHP than in Ruby. The author
misses the point that this might be because it takes 5 times more LOC
to do the same thing in PHP as it does in Ruby. My personal
experience is that the factor is more like 10-15 times more lines
than in Ruby. Ruby style emphasises elegant one-liners.
What?s more ?Web 2.0 is being built in PHP? is a moronic statement to
make given that most ?Web 2.0? applications are close-sourced and
therefore not included in the stats. Thankfully they gain some sanity
towards the end by pointing out the growth in open source Ruby
projects is much higher than those in PHP project, but they?re not
prepared to do the basic maths to realise that in fact, PHP is dying
relative to Ruby."
http://vagueware.com/2006/10/22/sunday-headlines-22nd-october-2006
Like you said, ‘back to work’.
–
Paul R.
http://vagueware.com
Nowhere near that long. That’s the point. The stats aren’t
reflective of reality and the “eats for breakfast” article relies
on stats. The site was under development 1 guy 2.5 years, 10% effort.
s.ross wrote:
Estimated Average Number of Developers (Effort/Schedule) = 10.14
‘SLOCCount’."
Total Estimated Cost to Develop = $ 1,359,520On Oct 22, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Paul R. wrote:
http://ohloh.net/wiki/articles/php_eats_rails
groundbreaking research. back to work
experience is that the factor is more like 10-15 times more lines
VagueWare.comLike you said, ‘back to work’.
–
Paul R.
http://vagueware.com
Do the COCOMO statistics seem accurate for your PHP framework? How
long was that actually in development?
_Kevin