On Jul 13, 12:19 pm, Danny Challis <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jet, > This is the only one I could find, haven't tried it yet, but it seems > promising, if a bit young: > > http://github.com/martinjandrews/roodi/tree
Metric_fu includes roodi - it's a decent place to start. > Jet wrote: > > I have been looking around for something like checkstyle (Java code > > review tool) for ruby. > >http://checkstyle.sourceforge.net/availablechecks.html I've personally found that (as Ryan suggested) the best "review" is a human reading the code. This is easier in Ruby than in Java, since there's considerably less visual noise in a well-written block of Ruby. The metric_fu tools do identify several of the remaining issues (code duplication, excessive cyclomatic complexity,etc) but aren't really intended to be used proscriptively (in other words, making a hard rule "no complexity ratings over 5 EVAR!" will lead to problems) but rather as a roadmap for detailed human review. --Matt Jones -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
