From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Xref: utzoo comp.software-eng:1945 comp.sw.components:125 comp.lang.ada:2618 comp.lang.c++:4539 comp.lang.eiffel:388 comp.lang.smalltalk:1330 comp.databases:3496 Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!ajpo!eberard From: eberard@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (Edward Berard) Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.sw.components,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.databases Subject: More Object-Oriented Metrics References Keywords: object-oriented, metrics Message-ID: <568@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu> Date: 2 Sep 89 18:39:31 GMT List-Id: A while ago, I posted the results of "the search for object-oriented metrics." Since then, I have both had requests for more information, and have become aware of new sources. What follows are some additional references. -- Ed Berard ----------------------------------- >From my own personal (Edward V. Berard) experience: At my former company (EVB Software Engineering, Inc.), when we began to design a series of reusable, object-oriented components, we wondered if there was a practical upper limit to the number of operations in the interface to a class. Based on conversations with Grady Booch, and on our own experience, we were able to say that: - most classes should have 20, or fewer, operations in their interfaces, with 24 operations being a practical upper limit. This does not mean that you cannot have a class with more than 24 operations in its interface. It just means that classes this size, or larger, will be exceptional, i.e., typically much less than 10% of the total number of classes in a class library. - most methods are very small, e.g., very few methods had more than 40 executable statements, and many involved only 1-3 executable statements. -------------------------- I have received some correspondence from Brian Nixon at the Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 1A4 (nixon@ai.toronto.edu). Nixon is doing some work with "performance theory for semantic data model implementations." I have not yet finished reading all of the technical reports he has sent me, bu they look interesting. -------------------------- Here is an excerpt from a larger article ("Readings in Object-Oriented Technology") I wrote: Object-Oriented Metrics As organizations begin shifting to object-oriented approaches, they find that some of the ways in which they used to measure things are less appropriate. People have already begun asking about object-oriented metrics. Although most work in this area is relatively new, there are a growing number of references, including: [Duhl and Damon, 1988]. J. Duhl and C. Damon, "A Performance Comparison of Object and Relational Databases Using the Sun Benchmark," OOPSLA '88 Conference Proceedings, Special Issue of SIGPLAN Notices, Vol. 23, No. 11, November 1988, pp. 153 - 163. [Hufnagel and Brown, 1989]. S.P. Hufnagel and J.C. Brown, "Performance Properties of Vertically Partitioned Object-Oriented Systems," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 8, August 1989, pp. 935 - 946. [Liberherr and Holland, 1989]. K.J. Liberherr and I.M. Holland, "Assuring Good Style for Object-Oriented Programs," IEEE Software, Vol. 6, No. 5, September 1989, pp. 38 - 48. [Liberherr and Riel, 1988]. K.J. Liberherr and A.J. Riel, "Demeter: a CASE Study of Software Growth Through Parameterized Classes, "Journal of Object-Oriented Programming, Vol. 1, No. 3, August/September 1988, pp. 8 - 22. -- Edward V. Berard Berard Software Engineering, Inc. 18620 Mateney Road Germantown, Maryland 20874 Phone: (301) 353-9652 E-Mail: eberard@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu