Skip to main content

Software Metrics Tools that are 'Pushed' by companies

In the last period of time I have been involved in different projects where quality is extremely important. Because of this we started to look around us and search for tools that can measure the quality of software (of the code itself) – software/code metrics.
This is why, this year I had some posts related to Sonar and different software metrics. Personally I looked on different tools that can measure this metrics and can share the content in a consistent and easy way. Until now, my search stopped over Sonar – that is a great tool, but can give you headaches when you need to configure it.
There are many companies that tracks the software metrics. This is a very good think. But in the same time I observed that this companies usually push only one tool that can be used to measure this metrics – THE TOOL. For them it is not important what kind of language you use for developing or if the given tool suites your needs. For them that tool is a standard and you need to obey.
Is this a good or bad thing?
From my opinion, the main scope of the company should be to ensure that for each project the metrics are measured and the team take them into consideration. The most important thing are the metrics them self, not the tool which is used to measure the metrics.
Why the tool is not important?
First of all different teams may feel conformable with different tools. The team should have the freedom to choose the tools that they like, as long as they respect the client or company standards. We are different and we have different preferences.
Also trying to push ‘the’ perfect tool for a job can create a lot of configuration and management problems. For example what happens if you have 20 teams that use a Sonar server and one of the team say that the update to the new version of Sonar or of a specific plugin cannot be made because there is an issues in the new version (of Sonar/plugin) that affect them? Another case can if you have 3 projects that are over 5M of lines of code.  In this cases you can have performance problems only one instance of the tool to measure and visualize the metrics.
If to push a tool as a standard, after a period of time you can realize that on the market the tool that you use is obsolete and there are new tools that make the job better. If you let each team to use any kind of tool, as long as the tools does what is required than you have better chance to use the best tools that are on the market all the time – natural selection. If one the market there is a tool that is perfect you can be sure that a large number of teams will use it.
The best scenario is to end up with 2 or more teams that wants to use the same tool and wants to share the same server. In this case it is clear that you will have the same tool for multiple teams. But this decision needs to come in a natural way from the team’s itself – not pushed by the management.

From the company perspective, it is important to create standards related to code quality and look at software metrics. This standards should require different metrics to be measured, but the tools that are used to make the measure should not be pushed. I’m not a fan to measure software metrics only to measure them. Because of this, the value of metrics has no value if no one interpret the results and take them into consideration.

Comments

  1. There is a reason some companies try to standardize on a set of tools (for metrics or something else) - learning curve, technical support and/or price.. The projects come and go, the team members come and go in projects that take many years, new projects appear where a few developers must become productive in a matter of days..

    Thats's why a big company usually have to standardize on a set of tools, but let a team choose another tool if they have a good reason for it and can afford the cost of learning it and training new members each time they join the project.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(

Azure AD and AWS Cognito side-by-side

In the last few weeks, I was involved in multiple opportunities on Microsoft Azure and Amazon, where we had to analyse AWS Cognito, Azure AD and other solutions that are available on the market. I decided to consolidate in one post all features and differences that I identified for both of them that we should need to take into account. Take into account that Azure AD is an identity and access management services well integrated with Microsoft stack. In comparison, AWS Cognito is just a user sign-up, sign-in and access control and nothing more. The focus is not on the main features, is more on small things that can make a difference when you want to decide where we want to store and manage our users.  This information might be useful in the future when we need to decide where we want to keep and manage our users.  Feature Azure AD (B2C, B2C) AWS Cognito Access token lifetime Default 1h – the value is configurable 1h – cannot be modified

What to do when you hit the throughput limits of Azure Storage (Blobs)

In this post we will talk about how we can detect when we hit a throughput limit of Azure Storage and what we can do in that moment. Context If we take a look on Scalability Targets of Azure Storage ( https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/articles/storage-scalability-targets/ ) we will observe that the limits are prety high. But, based on our business logic we can end up at this limits. If you create a system that is hitted by a high number of device, you can hit easily the total number of requests rate that can be done on a Storage Account. This limits on Azure is 20.000 IOPS (entities or messages per second) where (and this is very important) the size of the request is 1KB. Normally, if you make a load tests where 20.000 clients will hit different blobs storages from the same Azure Storage Account, this limits can be reached. How we can detect this problem? From client, we can detect that this limits was reached based on the HTTP error code that is returned by HTTP