TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mike Brenner <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mike Brenner <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 15 Apr 1998 08:27:43 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
Mike > ... add it up carefully ... dont just grep on the word with ...

Daniel > Of course, the counting also needs to consider that a context
       > clause of the form "WITH Foo, Bar;" should count as *two* not one

Thank you. I am very glad I gave my methods and tools as well as the counts.
There is not deniability (or validity) to measurements whose methods
cannot be critically examined.

The counts are STILL VALID because on this particular project we first went
through a pass and got rid of all commas in WITH and USE list to make
this count do-able with only a line scanner and not a full lexical scanner.

In general, a lexcial scanner, such as the one I published on
comp.lang.ada last month for removing comments from Ada programs,
should be used to do counts like this.

Although I have reacted previously against syntactic standards for
capitalization and indentation, it appears that WITH lists are
more readable without any commas. However, since the lexical scanner
was published, there can be no strong argument for this.

Mike Brenner

ATOM RSS1 RSS2