In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alan Gauld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 16:08:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cameron
>Laird) wrote:
>
>> I argue that it's a false opposition to categorize projects in
>> terms of use of single languages. Many projects are MUCH better
>> off with a mix
>
>In practice I have *never* worked on an industrial scale project
>that only used one language. The nearest I came was a small
>protocol convertor that only used C, SQL and some shell and
>awk - but that's still 4 languages! And the whole project was
>only 40,000 lines of code in about 20 files.
>
>And most projects use many more, I'd guess around 5-8 on an
>"average project" of around 300-500kloc. The biggest project I
>worked on had about 3.5Mloc and used:
>
>Assembler (680x0 and Sparc),
>C
>C++
>Lisp(Flavors)
>awk
>Bourne shell
>C shell - this was a mistake discovered too late to "fix"
>PL/SQL
>???? - A UI description language for a tool called TeleUse...
>Pascal - No, I don't know why...
>ASN.1 - with a commercial compiler
>
>We also had some IDL but since it was tool generated I'll ignore
>it...
>
>We also had an experimental version running on a NeXt box so it
>used Objective C for the UI instead of ???? and C++...
>
>A total of 13 languages... with 5 geographically dispersed teams
>comprising a total of 200 developers (plus about 40 testers).
>Interesting times...in the Chinese sense!
.
.
.
D. The TeleUSE language <URL: http://www.aonix.com/teleuse.html > is "D".
And I suspect your count is a lower bound. If you worked with TeleUSE,
somebody probably was doing Motif configuration, which arguably is a(n
impoverished configuration) language itself.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
