[BXLE_1-1-BitIs1]

I remember one programmer that I characterised with "He writes a lot of code". I ended up with one of his not small routines that I replaced with a one page assembler routine in MVS NIP rather than OPEN.

When reworking printing software to support multi color, I researched a commonly used subroutine though several layers of calls and replaced it with, yes, a single character constant.

I lost count of the many legacy applications where I tossed out great gobs of code produced by "productive" programmers.

[james_s_tayler]

10x is also about quality. Not raw output. A lot of times the really fast devs are fast because they don't stop to consider how they can do things in a fundamentally much better way, they just churn out the status quo as fast as possible. Those type are not 10x.

[RealityVoid]

I do not think 10x means "churns out code" but rather "produces results". And by this metric, by golly, there are a couple 10x out there for sure.

[prostheticvamp]

I think OP here was asserting that he was 10x in comparison to that guy, as being much more efficient.