And, IMO, similarly, ++s for those respondents who regard some of the underlying metrics as of less-than-probative or rigorous value. (My own, highly prejudiced view is that use of metrics is highly over-valued in ( some | many | most ) current uses.
For example by analogy, were you comparing the incidence of disease in human populations, you'd want to control for gender, age, ethnicity, geographic location, and a host of other factors, over a specific time span. Counting the number of projects or posts on SourceForge doesn't, per se, deal with the time span component. And to undermine my next observation, counting lines of "finished" code fails because some languages are more verbose than others.
Perhaps however, if reliable and current data is available, extending your results with some additional metrics such as "lines of debugged code/day" (or, far more fancifully, instances of use of finished -- eg. well debugged -- programs) would enhance the value.
But again, none of the above is intended to "rain on your parade." IMO, it's a fine piece of work and potentially of significant value.
In reply to Re: LUI: Language Usage Indicators page
by ww
in thread LUI: Language Usage Indicators page
by arbingersys
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |