David Bovill wrote:
Just a note - but so far I the diagramming of the code is proving a lot more
useful than I thought. Just one glance picks up all sorts of things -
handlers which are not linked to any events - probably hanging around from
some earlier incarnation - handlers which are bottle necks - which handlers
work best in backscripts of libraries - and a general impression of things
that are had to quantify like "is it too complex"? Most of all the pictures
are pretty :)
It'd be great to see those.
And yes, these types of automated code base analysis tools can be very
helpful. I made one last year that does two forms of cyclomatic
complexity, fan-in, fan-out, and a few others. I never got around to
diagramming because it seemed too much work relative to the additional
benefit, but in principle I agree it would be helpful to have. Got a
screenshot handy?
Better yet, will this be an open source tool? Perhaps there's a way it
could be modularized to incorporate other measurements so I could donate
mine to the mix.
I've been pondering whether to also leverage MetaCard's profiler into
such a tool, but it's a bit of work and as cool as it would be I'm not
sure my clients would let me take the time away to do it. :)
--
Richard Gaskin Managing Editor, revJournal
_______________________________________________________
Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
