From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 17 Oct 92 13:41:21 GMT
From: widget!jgg@uunet.uu.net  (Xmiester)
Subject: Re: Assy/Ada SLOC ratio;What's an Ada SLOC?
Message-ID: <1992Oct17.134121.11906@evb.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article  <rlk.719184816@amstel>,  rlk@VisiCom.COM (Bob Kitzberger) writes:
>
>I agree that for most seat-of-the-pants uses this LOC definition is
>sufficient.  IMHO, algorthmic complexity far overshadows SLOC in terms
>of important metrics, which McCabe et. al try to address.  
>

LOC metrics and complexity metrics provide somewhat orthogonal information.
LOC gives you size of code not complexity.  True that they are both useful
in estimation techniques, but one shouldn't compare the 2 and conclude
that one far overshadows the other.  Possibly you meant that given
you could only use one of the 2, that you'd prefer complexity metrics.


>However
>McCabe's complexity measures, if I remember correctly, don't take into
>account the complexity of the problem domain, so flight control
>software that uises the same depth of loops, nesting of IF statements,
>etc. as an accounting program will be deemed equal in complexity.
>

BTW, isn't this thread treading into the realm of comp.software-eng ???


John Goodsen
goodsenj@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu