Example of error range in senders:
FAMIX does not model shared variables and their initializers, thus
any sender in an initializer is lost.
Adrian your importer removed them.
Because old crap did it!
And I will reintroduce it.
If you browse senders with VW
you get them. And RBCrawler gets them as well, but filters senders by
the result of a flow analysis with method scope (by doing the same
abstract interpretation as RoelTyper does, as I found out later when
comparing the two tools).
That is, three numbers with different precision for the same metric.
Come on this is a dynamic typed language so nobody on earth find the
exact
set to any of my code if I decide it.
Example of error range in number of classes and methods:
Fame uses 4 anonymous subclasses of Fame.MetaDescription to
instantiate primitive descriptions. FAMIX will not model them, but
Object withAllSubclasses will list them.
That is, two numbers for the same metric.
Moose does support reflective use like anonymous subclasses.
i.e., even something as simple as the number of
classes is more than
one number and thus the correct number of classes is rather a range
of possible numbers. In physics error ranges are given as N+/-Err, in
software analysis they could be given by making clear what has been
measured and what is missing. See examples above.
Thanks prof.
Of course, whether the above errors matter or not will
depend on your
use case. For some use cases they might be no problem, for other use
cases they are critical or at least annoying.
Whether you care are not also depends on your distance from source
code. Consider for example a class blueprint. In smalltalk most #new
methods call an #initialize method that typically creates new objects
of a different type by calling #new again. Moose will thus visualize
the two methods as calling each other even though any developer can
tell they do not! For a consultant doing an offline analysis at
10'000 feet altitude that might be good enough, but for the developer
using the tool while working at ground level the visualization must
be precise or they stop using it because its results are obviously
false... and this is why RBCrawler takes the whole pain of running a
flow analysis, because I was eating my own dogfood :)
You are so much better than us
cheers,
AA
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev