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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,41100a78496a4c71 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,3fd68bc06c32b870 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-05 17:37:12 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.gamma.ru!Gamma.RU!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!colt.net!easynet-quince!easynet-melon!easynet.net!psiuk-p2!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: SLOC-wars Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 09:37:37 -0500 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1018017458 6599 136.170.200.133 (5 Apr 2002 14:37:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Apr 2002 14:37:38 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22170 misc.misc:6147 Date: 2002-04-05T14:37:38+00:00 List-Id: "Bobby D. Bryant" wrote in message news:a8jnnl$95l$1@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu... > > For current purposes all we seem to need is a metric that will give us a > rough feel for how big a chunk of code is. All we need is - > > o a number that gives the rough metric, > Good. > o a simple mechanism for acquiring the number, > Good. > o a "standard" mechanism, so that it will mean approximately the same > thing to everyone, > Not likely to achieve it across all organizations because what is relavent is always up for debate. Be consistent within an organization or project for how that body of code is measured & monitored and you'll be doing good. > o to the extent possible, a mechanism that works across languages. > Not at all possible. Languages have such hugely varying syntax and semantics that any attempt to compare one to the other is going to be hopeless. Whatever comparisons you attempt to make based on the numbers are going to either be a) meaningless or b) so debatable that you won't ever get anyone to agree to do anything based on the numbers. > I'm all for the most sophisticated free system that satisfies the above, > but I'm not interested in "more sophistication" if I can't get it by > running a script or typing a simple expression at the prompt. It's not > like we're bidding on a project or evaluating employee performance. > I once hacked together a program to count Halstead bits for Ada83 code. I had a lexical analyzer sitting around and the rest was just a matter of identifying input files and scanning over the tokens. A freebie tool to do it wouldn't be hard to accomplish if a lexical analyzer for Ada95 is available. Having one somewhere like AdaPower would create a "reference standard" that might help in comparison of Ada code bodies. Halstead bits is at least well defined and less subject to arguments about the relavence of comments or white space or similar things. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com