>The results can still be useful, taken with a grain of salt or two. or three, when you consider that a cache miss in present day RISC processors can "stall" you for eight or ten clock cycles. Doesn't take much to halve your effective performance. Got bit with this already ... ---------- From: Ed Falis[SMTP:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Wednesday, 12 February, 1997 9:38 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: RE> sloc to bytes of code Mike Brenner writes: > There are two main reasons people on the web claim to measure lines of code. > The first is to approximate the volume of work involved in developing > software. The second is to approximate the volume of work involved in > maintaining software. > There's a third reason - sizing resource requirements for embedded applications. I think it's reasonable in an Ada context state the following limitations: "excluding generic instantiations and calls to runtime routines" as a way of making the estimate of code expansion more meaningful. One then measures expansion for some set of code sequences that approximate the application code, estimates runtime system contribution under various conditions, and comes out with something semi-meaningful, while remaining aware that the standard deviation for the first measurement can be equal to the mean. The results can still be useful, taken with a grain of salt or two. - Ed Ed Falis Aonix (617) 221-7341 Question "Reality"