Did you know ... | Search Documentation: |
Pack logtalk -- logtalk-3.86.0/tools/code_metrics/NOTES.md |
This file is part of Logtalk https://logtalk.org/ SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2017-2024 Paulo Moura <pmoura@logtalk.org> SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2017 Ebrahim Azarisooreh <ebrahim.azarisooreh@gmail.com> SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License.
code_metrics
The purpose of this tool is to assess qualities of source code that may predict negative aspects such as entity coupling, cohesion, complexity, error-proneness, and overall maintainability. It is meant to be extensible via the addition of objects implementing new metrics.
This tool provides predicates for computing metrics for source files, entities, libraries, files, and directories. The actual availability of a particular predicate depends on the specific metric. A set of predicates prints, by default, the computed metric values to the standard output. A second set of predicates computes and returns a score (usually a compound term with the computed metric values as arguments).
This tool API documentation is available at:
[../../docs/library_index.html#code-metrics](../../docs/library_index.html#code-metrics)
This tool can be loaded using the query:
| ?- logtalk_load(code_metrics(loader))
.
To test this tool, load the tester.lgt
file:
| ?- logtalk_load(code_metrics(tester))
.
Currently, the following metrics are provided:
noc_metric
)nor_metric
)upn_metric
)cc_metric
)dit_metric
)coupling_metric
)doc_metric
)size_metric
)halstead_metric
and halstead_metric(Stroud)
)
A helper object, code_metrics
, is also provided, allowing running all
loaded individual metrics. For code coverage metrics, see the lgtunit
tool documentation.Ce / (Ce + Ca)
. Measures an entity resilience
to change. Ranging from 0.0 to 1.0, with 0.0 indicating a maximally stable
entity and 1.0 indicating a maximally unstable entity. Ideally, an entity
is either maximally stable or maximally unstable.The dependencies count includes direct entity relations plus predicate calls or dynamic updates to predicates in external objects or categories.
For more information on the interpretation of the coupling metric scores, see, e.g., the original paper by Robert Martin:
@inproceedings{citeulike:1579528, author = "Martin, Robert", booktitle = "Workshop Pragmatic and Theoretical Directions in Object-Oriented Software Metrics", citeulike-article-id = 1579528, citeulike-linkout-0 = "http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/oodmetrc.pdf", keywords = "diplomarbeit", organization = "OOPSLA'94", posted-at = "2007-08-21 11:08:44", priority = 0, title = "OO Design Quality Metrics - An Analysis of Dependencies", url = "http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/oodmetrc.pdf", year = 1994 }
The coupling metric was also influenced by the metrics rating system in Microsoft Visual Studio and aims to eventually emulate the functionality of a maintainability index score.
Predicates declared, user-defined, and called are interpreted as operators. Built-in predicates and built-in control constructs are ignored. Predicate arguments are abstracted, assumed distinct, and interpreted as operands. Note that this definition of operands is a significant deviation from the original definition, which used syntactic literals. A computation closer to the original definition of the metric would require switching to use the parser to collect information on syntactic literals, which would imply a much larger computation cost.
The computation of this metric is parameterized by the Stroud coefficient for computing the time required to program (default is 18). The following individual measures are computed:
EV = Pn + PAn
.EL = Cn + CAn
.V = EL * log2(EV)
.D = (Pn/2) * (CAn/An)
.E = D * V
.T = E/k
seconds (where k
is the Stroud number; defaults to 18).B = V/3000
.The Unique Predicate Nodes (UPN) metric is described in the following paper:
@article{MOORES199845, title = "Applying Complexity Measures to Rule-Based Prolog Programs", journal = "Journal of Systems and Software", volume = "44", number = "1", pages = "45 - 52", year = "1998", issn = "0164-1212", doi = "https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(98)10042-0", url = "http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121298100420", author = "Trevor T Moores" }
The nodes include called and updated predicates independently of where they are defined. It also includes multifile predicates contributed to other entities.
The cyclomatic complexity metric evaluates an entity code complexity by measuring the number of linearly independent paths through the code. In its current implementation, all defined predicates that are not called or updated are counted as graph-connected components (the reasoning being that these predicates can be considered entry points). The implementation uses the same predicate abstraction as the UPN metric. The defined predicates include multifile predicate definitions contributed by the entity to other entities.
For more details on this metric, see the original paper by Thomas J. McCabe:
@inproceedings{McCabe:1976:CM:800253.807712, author = "McCabe, Thomas J.", title = "A Complexity Measure", booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2Nd International Conference on Software Engineering", series = "ICSE '76", year = 1976, location = "San Francisco, California, USA", pages = "407--", url = "http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=800253.807712", acmid = 807712, publisher = "IEEE Computer Society Press", address = "Los Alamitos, CA, USA", keywords = "Basis, Complexity measure, Control flow, Decomposition, Graph theory, Independence, Linear, Modularization, Programming, Reduction, Software, Testing", }
All metrics require the source code to be analyzed to be loaded with the
source_data
flag turned on. For usage examples, see the SCRIPT.txt
file in the tool directory.
Be sure to fully understand the metrics individual meanings and any implementation limitations before using them to support any evaluation or decision process.
A set of options is available to specify code that should be excluded when applying code metrics:
[]
); all sub-directories of the excluded directories are also excluded; directories may be listed by full or relative path[]
); files may be listed by full path or basename, with or without extension[startup, scratch_directory]
)[]
)
New metrics can be implemented by defining an object that imports the
code_metric
category and implements its score predicates. There is
also a code_metrics_utilities
category that defines useful predicates
for the definition of metrics.
The following open-source command-line programs can count blank lines, comment lines, and lines of source code in many programming languages, including Logtalk:
cloc
- https://github.com/AlDanial/clocohcount
- https://github.com/blackducksoftware/ohcounttokei
- https://github.com/XAMPPRocky/tokei
Some of the metrics can also be applied to Prolog modules that Logtalk is
able to compile as objects. For example, if the Prolog module file is named
module.pl
, try:
| ?- logtalk_load(module, [source_data(on)])
.
Due to the lack of standardization of module systems and the abundance of proprietary extensions, this solution is not expected to work for all cases.
Some of the metrics can also be applied to plain Prolog code. For example,
if the Prolog file is named code.pl
, simply define an object including
its code:
:- object(code). :- include('code.pl'). :- end_object.
Save the object to an e.g. code.lgt
file in the same directory as the
Prolog file and then load it in debug mode:
| ?- logtalk_load(code, [source_data(on)])
.
In alternative, use the object_wrapper_hook
provided by the hook_objects
library:
| ?- logtalk_load(hook_objects(loader))
.
...
| ?- logtalk_load(code, [hook(object_wrapper_hook), source_data(on)])
.
With either wrapping solution, pay special attention to any compilation warnings that may signal issues that could prevent the plain Prolog code from working when wrapped by an object.