Board index » delphi » Theoretical

Theoretical

Consider a NEW project:  one that requires n-tier distributed architeture,
an Win32 UI, a browser UI, XML and web service capability.  If you knew that
it had to eventually run on the .Net platform would you:

1.  Develop it using D7 and hope for a relatively painless port or
2.  Learn VS.Net (C#) in a hurry or
3.  Wait for Delphi for .Net  ?

As you might guess, this is NOT such a theoretical problem for me.

Thank for your input.

 

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Jeffrey Michelson" wrote:
> Consider a NEW project:  one that requires no-tier distributed
> architeture, an Win32 UI, a browser UI, XML and web service
> capability.  If you knew that it had to eventually run on the .Net
> platform would you:

> 1.  Develop it using D7 and hope for a relatively painless port or
> 2.  Learn VS.Net (C#) in a hurry or
> 3.  Wait for Delphi for .Net  ?

> As you might guess, this is NOT such a theoretical problem for me.

While at first glance your formulation of the problem appears to be quite
precise there are a few things that make it easier to venture an opinion.
If for instance you need to get underway now and want to do it only
once, going to be using MS SQL Server as the database and it's reasonably to
assume that all users needing to run any client portion of the application
would or could have the .NET runtime installed then I would give strong
consideration to using C# and VS.NET.

Coming from a long Delphi background I have found that both the C# syntax
and the VS.NET IDE not all that hard to learn and use, OTOH I find the .NET
framework has a slightly steep learning curve.

--Hairy

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Jolyon Smith" wrote:
> "Harry Van Tassell"

> It's an interesting example where the tone of the language expresses the
> intended meaning in direct contradiction of the _actual_ meaning.

What! Me use the tone of language to expresses an intended meaning in
contradiction of the actual meaning - get out of here.<g>

I can't agree with you on "steep learning curve indicates the exact opposite
(using any meaningful representation of learning w.r.t time)."

See Alessandro's response.

--Hairy < huffing & puffing after climbing a steep learning curve>

Re:Theoretical


Quote
> http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=steep

I don't think he's having trouble with the definition of steep :-)
"Steep" is often used with the connotation "difficult" in English. Hence
the expression "That's a bit steep" referring to something being
expensive, or someone having a hard time of it. "A shallow learning
curve" doesn't have the same connotation :-)

I believe his point is that if you graph "amount of knowledge" on the
y-axis and time on the x-axis, the curve will actually be shallow when
something is difficult to learn.

Cheers,
Jim Cooper

____________________________________________

Jim Cooper      jcoo...@tabdee.ltd.uk
Tabdee Ltd      http://www.tabdee.ltd.uk

TurboSync - Connecting Delphi with your Palm
____________________________________________

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Jim Cooper" wrote:

> I don't think he's having trouble with the definition of steep :-)
> "Steep" is often used with the connotation "difficult" in English. Hence
> the expression "That's a bit steep" referring to something being
> expensive, or someone having a hard time of it. "A shallow learning
> curve" doesn't have the same connotation :-)

> I believe his point is that if you graph "amount of knowledge" on the
> y-axis and time on the x-axis, the curve will actually be shallow when
> something is difficult to learn.

I find your explaination of "a steep learning curve" a bit "shallow".<RBG>

I think it is mathematical calculus turned on end.<g>

While you prefer to look at the integral "depth of the summation of
knowledge acquired to date" I prefer to look at the differential (dy/dt) of
"the difficulty of knowledge acquisition" as the proper measure.

My dictionary defines steep as:

1.Having a sharp inclination; precipitous.
2.At a rapid or precipitous rate: a steep rise in salaries.
3.a. Excessive; stiff: a steep price. b. Ambitious; difficult: a steep
undertaking.

while shallow is defined as:

1.Measuring little from bottom to top or surface; lacking physical depth.
2.Lacking depth of intellect, emotion, or knowledge: "This is a shallow
parody of America" (Lloyd Rose). See synonyms at superficial.
3.Marked by insufficient inhalation of air; weak: shallow respirations.

--Hairy

Re:Theoretical


"Harry Van Tassell" <ha...@nada.com> wrote in message
news:3db3d5de@newsgroups.borland.com...

Quote
> I can't agree with you on "steep learning curve indicates the exact
opposite
> (using any meaningful representation of learning w.r.t time)."

> See Alessandro's response.

See my response to Alessandro...

Quote
> --Hairy < huffing & puffing after climbing a steep learning curve>

-- Jolyon - not even breaking a sweat after _drawing_a_line_on_a_graph_.

:)

--
Jolyon Smith
Neot Software Services Ltd.
http://www.neot.co.uk

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Jolyon Smith" <jsm...@neot.co.uk> wrote in message

news:3db3e513$1@newsgroups.borland.com...

Quote
> Ergo - the meaning _conveyed_ in the language contradicts the actual
meaning
> of the phrase.

The meaning of the phrase in which context? <G>

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Jolyon Smith"  wrote:

> And here is where the problem arises:  When the physical shape of a
> statistical curve is interpreted as something that has to be physically
> overcome.  Which is an incorrect use of the data - you do not have to
> climb the learning curve.

> Ergo - the meaning _conveyed_ in the language contradicts the actual
> meaning  of the phrase.

What ever you say Boss!

I can easily see why long ago Webster's "The American Dictionary of the
English Language" became a such a necessity.<g>

--Hairy

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Jolyon Smith" <jsm...@neot.co.uk> wrote in message

news:3db3e34d@newsgroups.borland.com...

Quote
> But the image that the phrase conjures in most people's mind is the one
you
> allude to - something steep = something hard to climb = this is going to
be
> difficult.  Which is wrong.  People simply don't climb statistical curves.

Jolyon, you are starting from the wrong end.
Terms like those are not born thinking of science but street talks, every
day life.
"I am gonna nail you" is another example.

Quote
> Instead of a dictionary (that doesn't even include "curve" in it's
> references!),

Since when? http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=curve

Quote
> try this URL: http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/lerncrv.htm

Interesting, still starting from the wrong end.

Quote
> and the problem of where "correct" use is more important than "accepted"

use:

Correct or wrong really depends on what you are judging it by.
In my example it's correct for instance and I belive that is the reference
most average people would give to the term.

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Jolyon Smith" <jsm...@neot.co.uk> wrote in message

news:3db3e397@newsgroups.borland.com...

Quote
> > See Alessandro's response.
> See my response to Alessandro...

See mine to you <G>

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Kyle Cordes" <k...@kylecordes.com> wrote in message

news:3db3f225$1@newsgroups.borland.com...

Quote
> Correct, but if you give up on plotting time on the Y axis, this makes
> sense:

Damn, you beated me by a minute!
I was about to post that <G>

Re:Theoretical


Quote
"Bob Dawson" <RBDaw...@prodigy.net> wrote in message

news:3db3f1c6$1@newsgroups.borland.com...

Quote
> imagine

> vert. axis = amount learned
> horz axis = resulting proficiency/productivity in topic

> A steep learning curve means that an extraordinary amount of material must
> be assimilated before any degree of productivity in the subject can be
> expected, whereas a shallow learning curve means that one can start seeing
> productivity gains (movement along the horizontal axis) commensurate with
> each little piece of the puzzle grasped.

Problem:  This sort of curve would not, in general, be accepted since it
requires an x-axis variable that may both increase and decrease.
Productivity is not an ever increasing value - there are thresholds in
learning where productivity/proficiency falls _back_ with greater
understanding as one acquires sufficient knowledge to be able to question
what you are learning, and so begin to doubt what has already been learned,
requiring more learning to dispel those doubts.

Convention requires that x plots an ever increasing variable, which is why
"time" is so often found there.

So, to comply with convention, let's flip the axes on your graph, so that
"amount learned" is on the x-axis.

Of course, the only meaningful way to measure "amount learned" is to plot
the time spent learning it.  (Any other measure is directly, or almost
directly, equivalent to the degree of productivity or proficiency, which is
what we are plotting on y, and so is meaningless).

So in fact all you have done is change the shape of the curve merely by
flipping time onto the y-axis.  But since this is not acceptable, it is
necessary to disguise the fact that it is "time".

Quote
> Using this representation, a steep learning curve will be seen whereever
one
> can study long and hard

And here is the proof that the y-axis is simply "time" disguised.  You infer
the passage of time from increasing values of y.

This is fun.  :)
--
Jolyon Smith
Neot Software Services Ltd.
http://www.neot.co.uk

Re:Theoretical


"Alessandro Federici (RemObjects Software)" <a...@nospam.msdelphi.com> wrote
in message news:3db3f05a$1@newsgroups.borland.com...

Quote
> Terms like those are not born thinking of science but street talks, every
> day life.

One suggested etymology would indicate that this term _is_ born of science -
psychology.

Quote
> > Instead of a dictionary (that doesn't even include "curve" in it's
> > references!),

> Since when? http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=curve

Since I went to that URL, entered "curve" in the search box and got back
only acronyms for C.U.R.V

I just tried again and it threw up proper results, so I think I, my keyboard
or IE must have goofed, cos to get that I have to search for "curv".  I
don't always wait for IE to finish spinning it's little globe and I've
noticed in the past that sometimes IE decides it has a better use for my
keystrokes than I intended.

When I got the duff result before I didn't bother looking for "learning
curve", but now I have, and you might like to see what your own preferred
reference has to say on the matter:

"A graph that depicts rate of learning, especially a graph of progress
 in the mastery of a skill against the time required for such mastery."

"Rates of learning .. against time".  As someone else professed a preference
for rates of change over time, this is a useful reinforcement of my whole
point.

If the rate of change of knowledge is high, then the process of learning is
easy.  A high rate of change will yield a _steep_ curve, using dictionary
definitions of all terms involved, including "steep" and "curve".

It is you who is coming at the thing from the "wrong end".  In fact, from
_completely_ the wrong direction, by confusing the physical effort needed to
climb a hill with rate of change illustrated by a curve on a graph
illustrating the effort_less_ness with which [a non-physical] objective is
attained.

Quote
> > try this URL: http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/lerncrv.htm

> Interesting, still starting from the wrong end.

Why?

Quote
> > and the problem of where "correct" use is more important than "accepted"
> use:

> Correct or wrong really depends on what you are judging it by.
> In my example it's correct for instance and I belive that is the reference
> most average people would give to the term.

It may have been your intended use, and in that sense it is also "correct
use", but the fact remains that a steep learning curve is indicative of
something that is easy to learn, yet the phrase is used to mean the exact
opposite in almost all cases that it is used in everyday language.

If the whole world says that "the sky is pink" does that make the sky pink?

Please note that I'm not trying to suggest that you or anyone else is _dumb_
for using this phrase.  I simply find it curious that we all continue to do
so even though it is factually, demonstrably inaccurate.

--
Jolyon Smith
Neot Software Services Ltd.
http://www.neot.co.uk

Re:Theoretical


"Alessandro Federici (RemObjects Software)" <a...@nospam.msdelphi.com> wrote
in message news:3db3f0b5$1@newsgroups.borland.com...

Quote
> "Jolyon Smith" <jsm...@neot.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:3db3e513$1@newsgroups.borland.com...

> > Ergo - the meaning _conveyed_ in the language contradicts the actual
> meaning
> > of the phrase.

> The meaning of the phrase in which context? <G>

The _factual_ meaning, which is that a steep learning curve is the profile
of a skill that is _easy_ to learn.

Context is the bedfellow of inference and insinuation.
Truth and fact do not involve context.

[ooer - came over all green-{*word*76}ied and pointy eared there for a moment]

:-)

--
Jolyon Smith
Neot Software Services Ltd.
http://www.neot.co.uk

Re:Theoretical


Hey guys.... um.... my original question...? <smile>

Jeff

Go to page: [1] [2] [3] [4]

Other Threads