Now 376175 lines of code

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?

regards, tom lane

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?

250,000

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  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

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

I found these numbers quite interesting.

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://www.op.net/~candle
  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

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

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/&gt;

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

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

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

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/

I compute the code count with:

find . -name \*.[chyl] | xargs cat| wc -l

-- 
  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

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

On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 01:30:25PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:

I compute the code count with:

find . -name \*.[chyl] | xargs cat| wc -l

Right, that solves the problem others might be seeing, with the command
line getting expanded and silently chopped off. For example, no one
seems to have commented on the -8% of inline comments reported by
Peter's c_count! Funny math, indeed.

Ross
--
Open source code is like a natural resource, it's the result of providing
food and sunshine to programmers, and then staying out of their way.
[...] [It] is not going away because it has utility for both the developers
and users independent of economic motivations. Jim Flynn, Sunnyvale, Calif.

Ross J. Reedstrom writes:

For example, no one seems to have commented on the -8% of inline
comments reported by Peter's c_count! Funny math, indeed.

If you had actually done the math ;-) you would have noticed that the
percentage of the inline comments is negative because those lines have
both comments and code, therefore the total has to exclude these lines
once when adding comments and code.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/

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