>  SwaLint features a plug-in oriented model to provide its so called test.
>  It provides an API to enable a developer to include his own tests more
> easily
>  than with SmallLint.

SmallLint is plug-in based as well. Have a look at Slime [1], this is
an extension to SmallLint that detects Seaside specific defects and
code smells.

>  it. Additionally, a metrics based plug-in is included, which currenly
> should decect god
>  classes and data classes.

The Disharmonies are interesting, but could be trivially added as a
SmallLint plugin.

>  Besides, we tried to make SwaLint to be more usable than SmallLint is.

Many years ago i've integrated SmallLint into SUnit [2], so that Lint
rules can be run as part of the unit tests. I've added pragmas to
ignore certain rules at specific places. This is all done in an
ad-hock matter, but I think this is nice way to go without requiring
new tools.

Why do you think SmallLint is not useable? How do you do the scoping?

Cheers,
Lukas

[1] http://www.lukas-renggli.ch/blog/slime
[2] http://source.lukas-renggli.ch/essential.html

-- 
Lukas Renggli
http://www.lukas-renggli.ch