And here we run into a major disconnect. To the enterprise, scripted
solutions look like one-offs, not strategic systems designed to high
standards of quality and able to evolve along with the business.
What the enterprise folks don’t get is that scripted systems can be
engineered to meet these requirements. So they lean toward C++ and
Java, and then rely on powerful integrated development environments,
like Eclipse and IntelliJ IDEA, to make fluid refactoring possible.
These tools can work very well. “They’re complicated,” observes
Ward, “and you have to learn how to work them – but boy, when you
do, they make those languages start to feel like scripting languages.”
And here we run into a major disconnect. To the enterprise, scripted
solutions look like one-offs, not strategic systems designed to high
standards of quality and able to evolve along with the business.
What the enterprise folks don’t get is that scripted systems can be
engineered to meet these requirements. So they lean toward C++ and
Java, and then rely on powerful integrated development environments,
like Eclipse and IntelliJ IDEA, to make fluid refactoring possible.
These tools can work very well. “They’re complicated,” observes
Ward, “and you have to learn how to work them – but boy, when you
do, they make those languages start to feel like scripting languages.”
Yes, but don’t forget the flip side (from the same article) :
There’s myopia coming from the other direction too. Scripters like to tout
order-of-magnitude productivity gains but, as Ward points out, “they don’t know
enough about how complexity leaks into business systems, so even if your
language is 4x more productive, it only buys you another year before disaster
strikes.”