On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 31 May 2011 21:44, laurent laffont <[email protected]> wrote: > > Another idea (don't know how hard it is) is to have test coverage + > comment > > coverage in Hudson. > > Then we can start to consider that dead code = code with no test or no > > comment. > > Laurent, have you tried to run lint rule checker in pharo image? > No - I talk about test coverage, not lint. I don't think lint worth running on a full image. Test coverage is really useful. Indeed, I use test coverage on my projects every day. Lint once a year :) Laurent. > I tried once and if i remember correctly, there are like 30000 notices. > Now, what you think, is it possible for any human to visit all of them > step by step > analyze and then fix the code? It is enormous amount of data (and most > of it is just white noise, > or insignificant detail). Now how to filter that noise and address the > only things which you should take care of? > And since we're continuting development, every time you doing an > update, this stuff should be revisited, > compared and cross-checked again. And we don't have such facility: > take image A and B, and compare their lint output. > I imagine this would require a quite sophisticated database , with UI > on top of that, which will allow you to navigate > through these notices mark them as invalid, or fixed etc etc.. > What i mean that automated tools is cool. But they cannot solve all > our problems: every such issue should be analyzed and considered by > developer. > Because we're still not yet at the point, where system can reason > about itself and automatically improve itself without need of our > attention :) > If this day will come, then it will be the end of humanity (at least > in its current form - homo sapiens sapiens ;) > > > Laurent. > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > >
