[btilly]

I would assume that "et al" hides a lot of the same people contributing to multiple papers. The wikipedia estimate is likely wrong, but I don't think by an order of magnitude.

I agree with you on the Linux kernel. I even noted that about half only contributed one patch.

I suspect that I disagree with you about what Dijkstra's point was. When you're programming, there is nowhere to hide from the fact of your code not running. By contrast in pure math, a surprising amount of sloppiness can be hidden in the fact that minor papers do not always get completely rigorous view. Therefore if you're inclined to that form of sloppiness, you're better off in pure math. (Which is not to say that all people in pure math are sloppy in that way.)

I don't think he's right - I've met too many programmers and bad computer scientists to have illusions that all are capable - but he does have a point.