Thread
-
Re: Now 376175 lines of code
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2000-10-20T01:29:17Z
FYI, it is 376k lines of C code, not bytes. [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > What is amazing, is that you can make such complete system on Linux with > only 376k of code... > > I think bloated software is not part of your dictionnary, and that's good... > > Franck Martin > Database Development Officer > SOPAC South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission > Fiji > E-mail: franck@sopac.org <mailto:franck@sopac.org> > Web site: http://www.sopac.org/ <http://www.sopac.org/> > > This e-mail is intended for its recipients only. Do not forward this > e-mail without approval. The views expressed in this e-mail may not be > neccessarily the views of SOPAC. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us] > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 1:03 PM > To: Ross J. Reedstrom > Cc: Tom Lane; PostgreSQL-development > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Now 376175 lines of code > > > Never mind. I see I ran it already on 7.0 and got 376k. You used my > idential script to get these numbers. I will use your nice numbers for > a presentation at the show in two weeks. Thanks a lot. > > > > > On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 01:45:31AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > > > I did a distclean on 7.0, and ran 'wc' on all the *.[chly] files, and > > > > got a much larger number than what we got from Berkeley. > > > > 376175 > > > > Seems someone has been busy. :-) > > > > > > Forgive a newbie --- what was the count for the original Berkeley code? > > > Do you have the same numbers for other milestones? > > > > Not that I'm a big believer in kloc as a measure of productivity (oh, > > Bruce just said busy, didn't he? That's a different story...), I happen > > to have a couple historical trees laying around, starting with the last > > one I found at Berkeley: > > > > postgres-v4r2 244581 > > postgres95-1.09 178976 > > postgresql-6.1.1 200709 > > postgresql-6.3.2 260809 > > postgresql-6.4.0 297479 > > postgresql-6.4.2 297918 > > postgresql-6.5.3 331278 > > > > Well, more than a couple trees, I guess (actually I unpacked tarballs > > for most of these) > > > > HTH, > > Ross > > -- > > Ross J. Reedstrom, Ph.D., <reedstrm@rice.edu> > > NSBRI Research Scientist/Programmer > > Computer and Information Technology Institute > > Rice University, 6100 S. Main St., Houston, TX 77005 > > > > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
-
Re: Now 376175 lines of code
Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> — 2000-10-20T16:20:59Z
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > FYI, it is 376k lines of C code, not bytes. > > How did you calculate that? I get this using c_count over all .c and .h > files: > > 20903 lines had comments 25.4 % > 6603 comments are inline -8.0 % > 11911 lines were blank 14.5 % > 7287 lines for preprocessor 8.9 % > 48716 lines containing code 59.3 % > 82214 total lines 100.0 % > > Surely we don't have 294000 lines of Java, C++, Shell, and Perl??? doing the following in version 6.5.3 in src/backend [hannu@hu backend]$ cat */*.[ch] */*/*.[ch] */*/*/*.[ch]| wc gives 208284 658632 5249304 So you (or c_count ;) must be missing some files in src/ ther result was [hannu@hu src]$ cat */*.[ch] */*/*.[ch] */*/*/*.[ch] */*/*/*/*.[ch]| wc 311469 1069935 8440682 ------------- Hannu
-
Re: Now 376175 lines of code
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> — 2000-10-20T17:11:07Z
> Bruce Momjian writes: > > > FYI, it is 376k lines of C code, not bytes. > > How did you calculate that? I get this using c_count over all .c and .h > files: > > 20903 lines had comments 25.4 % > 6603 comments are inline -8.0 % > 11911 lines were blank 14.5 % > 7287 lines for preprocessor 8.9 % > 48716 lines containing code 59.3 % > 82214 total lines 100.0 % > > Surely we don't have 294000 lines of Java, C++, Shell, and Perl??? I just counted lines, not line content. Not sure which is more meaningful. Our comments are as important as the code, sometimes, though they do not add functionality to the application. I am not inclined to inflate numbers, but I am not sure the 59% number is accurate either. Opinions? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
-
Re: Now 376175 lines of code
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> — 2000-10-20T17:12:42Z
Bruce Momjian writes: > FYI, it is 376k lines of C code, not bytes. How did you calculate that? I get this using c_count over all .c and .h files: 20903 lines had comments 25.4 % 6603 comments are inline -8.0 % 11911 lines were blank 14.5 % 7287 lines for preprocessor 8.9 % 48716 lines containing code 59.3 % 82214 total lines 100.0 % Surely we don't have 294000 lines of Java, C++, Shell, and Perl??? -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/
-
Re: Now 376175 lines of code
Karel Zak <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz> — 2000-10-20T17:48:41Z
On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Hannu Krosing wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > > > FYI, it is 376k lines of C code, not bytes. > > > > How did you calculate that? I get this using c_count over all .c and .h > > files: > > > > 20903 lines had comments 25.4 % > > 6603 comments are inline -8.0 % > > 11911 lines were blank 14.5 % > > 7287 lines for preprocessor 8.9 % > > 48716 lines containing code 59.3 % > > 82214 total lines 100.0 % > > > > Surely we don't have 294000 lines of Java, C++, Shell, and Perl??? > > doing the following in version 6.5.3 in src/backend > > [hannu@hu backend]$ cat */*.[ch] */*/*.[ch] */*/*/*.[ch]| wc > > gives > > 208284 658632 5249304 > > So you (or c_count ;) must be missing some files > > in src/ ther result was > [hannu@hu src]$ cat */*.[ch] */*/*.[ch] */*/*/*.[ch] */*/*/*/*.[ch]| wc > 311469 1069935 8440682 Just now downloaded from ftp.postgresql.org: $ tar -zxvf postgresql-6.5.3.tar.gz $ cd postgresql-6.5.3 $ wc `find -name "*.[ch]"` 318131 1089740 8585092 total $ wc `find -name "*"` 756810 3037982 25583644 total $ cd src $ wc `find -name "*.[ch]"` 311469 1069935 8440682 total $ wc `find -name "*"` 519318 2024262 16656475 total $ tar -zxvf postgresql-7.0.2.tar.gz $ cd postgresql-7.0.2 $ wc `find -name "*.[ch]"` 368502 1263333 9910813 total $ wc `find -name "*"` 756810 3037982 25583644 total $ cd src $ wc `find -name "*.[ch]"` 361297 1240788 9751161 total $ wc `find -name "*"` 596772 2360555 18574015 total Karel
-
Re: Now 376175 lines of code
Gunnar R|nning <gunnar@candleweb.no> — 2000-10-21T10:03:07Z
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > I just counted lines, not line content. Not sure which is more > meaningful. Our comments are as important as the code, sometimes, > though they do not add functionality to the application. I am not > inclined to inflate numbers, but I am not sure the 59% number is > accurate either. > Counting the number of lines is only meaningful as a relative measurement of complexity and spent effort - IMHO. And I think lines of code measurements usually ignore blank lines and lines with comments. However, Preprocessor directives is code - and sometimes it would be fair to add some extra lines for the increased complexity caused by cool CPP macros ;-) Regards, Gunnar Gunnar