Some folks consider the development of software to be a craft; others claim that it is engineering.
As much as I would like for software development to be engineering, I consider it a craft.
Engineering is a craft that must work within measurable constraints, and must optimize some measurable attributes. For example, bridges must support a specific, measurable load, and minimize the materials used in construction (again, measurable quantities).
We do not do this for software.
We manage not software but software development. That is, we measure the cost and time of the development effort, but we do not measure the software itself. (The one exception is measuring the quality of the software, but that is a difficult measurement and we usually measure the number and severity of defects, which is a negative measure.)
If we are to engineer software, then we must measure the software. (We can -- and should -- measure the development effort. Those are necessary measurements. But they are not, by themselves, sufficient for engineering.)
What can we measure in software? Here are some suggestions:
- Lines of code
- Number of classes
- Number of methods
- Average size of classes
- Complexity (cyclomatic, McCabe, or whatever metric you like)
- "Boolean complexity" (the number of boolean constants used within code that are not part of initialization)
- The fraction of classes that are immutable
Some might find the notion of measuring lines of code abhorrent. I will argue that it is not the metric that is evil, it is the use of it to rank and rate programmers. The misuse of metrics is all too easy and can lead to poor code. (You get what you measure and reward.)
Why do we not measure these things? (Or any other aspect of code?)
Probably because there is no way to connect these metrics to project cost. In the end, project cost is what matters. Without a translation from lines of code (or any other metric) to cost, the metrics are meaningless. The code may be one class of ten thousand lines, or one hundred classes of one hundred lines each; without a conversion factor, the cost of each design is the same. (And the cost of each design is effectively zero, since we cannot convert design decisions into costs.)
Our current capabilities do not allow us to assign cost to design, or code size, or code complexity. The only costs we can measure are the development costs: number of programmers, time for testing, and number of defects.
One day in the future we will be able to convert complexity to cost. When we do, we will move from craft to engineering.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment