|
A '''Software Defect Indicator''' is a pattern whichthat can be found in [[source code]] whichthat is strongly correlated with a [[software defect]], an error or omission in the source code of a computer program that may cause it to malfunction. When inspecting the source code of [[computer program]]s, it is not always possible to identify defects directly, but there are often patterns, sometimes called [[anti-pattern|anti-patterns]], indicating that defects are present.
When inspecting the source code of [[computer program|computer programs]], it is not always possible to identify defects directly, but there are often patterns (sometimes called [[anti-pattern|anti-patterns]]) indicating that defects are present.
Some examples of Software Defect Indicators:
* Disabled Code: Code has been written and the programmer has disabled it, or switched it off, without making it clear why it has been disabled, or when or whether it will be reenabledre-enabled.
* Routine Too Complex: A program (method, module, routine, subroutine, procedure, or any named block of code) contains more than 10 binary terms in conditional statements.<ref>William T. Ward: "Software Defect Prevention Using McCabe's Complexity Metric", ''Hewlett-Packard Journal'', April 1989, pp 64-69: Control-flow complexity has been correlated with low reliabiltyreliability and frequent errors.</ref> ▼
* Unused Variables: There are unreferenced variables in the code. Unreferenced variables are a strong indicator for other errors.<ref>David N. Card, Victor E. Church, and William W. Agresti: "An Empirical Study of Software Design Practices", ''IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering'', SE-12, no. 2, February 1986, pp 264-71: 46 percent of routines with no unused variables had no errors compared to only 17 to 29 percent for those with one or more unreferenced variables.</ref> ▼▲* Routine Too Complex: A program (method, module, routine, subroutine, procedure, or any named block of code) contains more than 10 binary terms in conditional statements.<ref>William T. Ward: "Software Defect Prevention Using McCabe's Complexity Metric", ''Hewlett-Packard Journal'', April 1989, pp 64-69: Control-flow complexity has been correlated with low reliabilty and frequent errors.</ref>
▲* Unused Variables: There are unreferenced variables in the code. Unreferenced variables are a strong indicator for other errors.<ref>David N. Card, Victor E. Church, and William W. Agresti: "An Empirical Study of Software Design Practices", ''IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering'', SE-12, no. 2, February 1986, pp 264-71: 46 percent of routines with no unused variables had no errors compared to only 17 to 29 percent for those with one or more unreferenced variables.</ref>
==References==
==See also==
* [[Cyclomatic Complexitycomplexity]]
* [[Anti-pattern]]
* [[Computer program]]
|
