SCJP, SCJD, SCEA 5 "Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science!" Agatha Heterodyne (Girl Genius)
Keith Barlow wrote:This actually raises a question for me: is it possible to write domain-specific defect detections for Sonar? What would this look like - a set of rules or a static code analysis plugin?
[OCP 17 book] | [OCP 11 book] | [OCA 8 book] [OCP 8 book] [Practice tests book] [Blog] [JavaRanch FAQ] [How To Ask Questions] [Book Promos]
Other Certs: SCEA Part 1, Part 2 & 3, Core Spring 3, TOGAF part 1 and part 2
Keith Barlow wrote:Thanks! I think Ann picked up on where I was going with this. I have heard arguments for lines of code being one of the greatest contributors to increasing number of defects and also heard arguments towards increased levels of complexity as having the greatest contribution towards defects. As Ann points out, increasing numbers of duplications can also be a major contributor.
<snip>
What I was asking for is a feel, from an experienced perspective, of just what dimensions tend to have the most influence on overall maintainability of a project. Defects reported by FindBugs, PMD, etc. seem to be mostly langauge usage and syntax defects - their severity determines how detrimental it is (e.g. a misnamed variable or a resource leak). While it's great to catch them, I think it still leaves open the whole realm of logical defects. I am not sure if any generic (non-domain specific) automated testing can catch them but I have a tendency to think the dimensions questioned above (LOC, Complexity, duplications) can be great contributors to that class of defects.
This actually raises a question for me: is it possible to write domain-specific defect detections for Sonar? What would this look like - a set of rules or a static code analysis plugin?
SCJP, SCJD, SCEA 5 "Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science!" Agatha Heterodyne (Girl Genius)
Burk Hufnagel wrote:I haven't used SonarQube, but I did use Sonar and I expect it still works in much the same way.
Keith Barlow wrote:Burk,
SonarQube is Sonar. It was just rebranded not too long ago due to some kind of licensing restriction. You're advice seems to be inline with what the others have suggested. I certainly intend to check it out. Thanks for the tip on the book as well. I will certainly check that out too, as I am always looking for good reading material. I suspect it is a very worthy read!
Thanks!
Keith
SCJP, SCJD, SCEA 5 "Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science!" Agatha Heterodyne (Girl Genius)
G. Ann Campbell wrote:
Burk Hufnagel wrote:I haven't used SonarQube, but I did use Sonar and I expect it still works in much the same way.
In fact, they are the same thing, just renamed from one version to the next.
SCJP, SCJD, SCEA 5 "Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science!" Agatha Heterodyne (Girl Genius)
Did you see how Paul cut 87% off of his electric heat bill with 82 watts of micro heaters? |