Source lines of code: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:08, 22 June 2019

Revision as of 15:19, 22 June 2019

Line 78:

Another increasingly common problem in comparing SLOC metrics is the difference between auto-generated and hand-written code. Modern software tools often have the capability to auto-generate enormous amounts of code with a few clicks of a mouse. For instance, [[graphical user interface builder]]s automatically generate all the source code for a [[Graphical control element (software)|graphical control elements]] simply by dragging an icon onto a workspace. The work involved in creating this code cannot reasonably be compared to the work necessary to write a device driver, for instance. By the same token, a hand-coded custom GUI class could easily be more demanding than a simple device driver; hence the shortcoming of this metric.

There are several cost, schedule, and effort estimation models which use SLOC as an input parameter, including the widely used Constructive Cost Model ([[COCOMO]]) series of models by [[Barry Boehm]] et al., [[PRICE Systems]] [[True S]] and Galorath's [[SEER-SEM]]. While these models have shown good predictive power, they are only as good as the estimates (particularly the SLOC estimates) fed to them. Many{{Who|date=August<ref>IFPUG 2010}}[http://www.qpmg.com/pdf/articles/Quantifying_the_Benefits_Using_Function_Points.pdf "Quantifying the Benefits of Using Function Points"]</ref> have advocated the use of [[function point]]s instead of SLOC as a measure of functionality, but since function points are highly correlated to SLOC (and cannot be automatically measured) this is not a universally held view.

===Example===