On 12/18/16 6:47 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2016-12-18 01:34, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Yeah, std/datetime.d is a monster, from what I can tell owing to a rote
and redundant way of handling unittesting. I didn't look at its
dependencies, but I doubt they are special. I was quite vocal about
breaking it up, but I got mellower with time since (a) someone measured
its size without unittests and it was something like one order of
magnitude smaller, and (b) there was really no more trouble using or
maintaining it than with anything else in Phobos.
Most other languages don't have inline unit tests, which saves a lot of
lines of code.
How does the lack of the feature save lines? Doesn't it just move them
elsewhere?
Not sure if this is the case. But if we have unit tests that are more on
the functional/integration side perhaps those should be moved to a
separate file structure.
I should also add that each large project has a couple of outliers like
that. I even recall a switch of a couple thousand lines once :o).
Just because another project is worse doesn't mean we're in a good
position.
The point was just that it's par for the course.
Rubocop, the major linter in the Ruby world, will complain if a class is
more than 100 lines of code.
Does that include full documentation and unittests?
I think that is on the extreme side but I
think any module with more than 2000 lines of code is too big.
Phobos' average file size 2055 is lines and median file size is 903
lines. Do you find these appropriate for your preferences, considering
this size includes documentation and unittests? Would you find it
helpful to use a tool that collapses these?
Andrei
