Larry Jones wrote: > > Thomas Tuft Muller writes: > > > > I imagine a scenario where each > > programmer is forced to check in once a week (preferrably with a specific > > tag indicating that the files are possibly untested/uncompilable). Proper > > scripts could analyze the code regarding inter alia number of > > lines/words/bytes, commenting, commenting rules, coding-rules, class > > cohesion, method-length, class-length, parameter names, variable names, etc, > > etc. In addition the scripts should also take into account the state of the > > archive last time the scripts were run, and analyze/provide statistics about > > the change. > > > > Combined with a weekly/monthly submitted timeplan from the programmers, this > > could be a valuable tool for managers to see the overall as well as > > individual progress/quality. > > > > Does such analying scripts exist for the CVS archive format? > > I sincerely hope not. > > -Larry Jones > > Hmph. -- Calvin > Sorry to spoil your day Larry, but such scripts do exist (some managers still do not understand that Source Lines Of Code [SLOC] is only useful with Xlib and raw C, but not Motif or GTK and C++ or java). I will however only give you the first line of such an abomination that I have been forced to live under: cvs checkout -r HEAD -p $MODULE_NAME 2>/dev/null > $TMP_FILE2 It's up to you to determine what kind of tyrannical analysis of $TMP_FILE2 you want to do with a FORTRAN program or perl script. -- ______________________________________________________________________________ Todd Denniston, Code 6067, NSWC Crane mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you. -- Vance Petree, Virginia Power
The opinions expressed here are not sanctioned by and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
