3 ms·

I recently pointed this impressive tool at a project of mine and got the following. Care to share the sloccount output for your project? SLOC Directory SLOC-

by sutro 18y ago

I recently pointed this impressive tool at a project of mine and got the following. Care to share the sloccount output for your project? SLOC Directory SLOC-by-Language (Sorted) 18246 sutro java=18246 Totals grouped by language (dominant language first): java: 18246 (100.00%) Total Physical Source Lines of Code (SLOC) = 18,246 Development Effort Estimate, Person-Years (Person-Months) = 4.22 (50.63) (Basic COCOMO model, Person-Months = 2.4 * (KSLOC**1.05)) Schedule Estimate, Years (Months) = 0.93 (11.11) (Basic COCOMO model, Months = 2.5 * (person-months**0.38)) Estimated Average Number of Developers (Effort/Schedule) = 4.56 Total Estimated Cost to Develop = $ 569,991 (average salary = $56,286/year, overhead = 2.40).

DarkShikari 18y ago
Totals grouped by language (dominant language first): ansic: 29367 (70.03%) asm: 9186 (21.91%) sh: 3124 (7.45%) perl: 257 (0.61%) I've always found those cost estimators to be rather useless (they are often off--literally--by orders of magnitude). A far better estimate would be to look at the actual development cost of competing commercial products with a full-time development team. It also depends heavily on how the program is designed: it's possible for the same amount of "effort" worth of code to vary by a factor of ten or more between two programs that serve the same task. Some programmers naturally write extremely terse code that makes heavy use of abstraction, while others tend to be quite verbose. Plus, it's one thing to write code: it's another thing to have that code become good. My project above has not changed significantly in code size in almost three years, despite the fact that every year has had more development than the previous one. Such metrics would state that the value of the above project has merely doubled since it was originally conceived in a personal CVS repository by original developer Laurent Aimar, despite the fact that easily 95% of its value has been added since the original bare-bones framework released five years ago.

by sutro 18y ago

DarkShikari 18y ago

Totals grouped by language (dominant language first): ansic: 29367 (70.03%) asm: 9186 (21.91%) sh: 3124 (7.45%) perl: 257 (0.61%) I've always found those cost estimators to be rather useless (they are often off--literally--by orders of magnitude). A far better estimate would be to look at the actual development cost of competing commercial products with a full-time development team. It also depends heavily on how the program is designed: it's possible for the same amount of "effort" worth of code to vary by a factor of ten or more between two programs that serve the same task. Some programmers naturally write extremely terse code that makes heavy use of abstraction, while others tend to be quite verbose. Plus, it's one thing to write code: it's another thing to have that code become good. My project above has not changed significantly in code size in almost three years, despite the fact that every year has had more development than the previous one. Such metrics would state that the value of the above project has merely doubled since it was originally conceived in a personal CVS repository by original developer Laurent Aimar, despite the fact that easily 95% of its value has been added since the original bare-bones framework released five years ago.