On 02.01.2013, at 23:17, Colin Putney <colin at wiresong.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
> http://blog.datomic.com/2012/10/codeq.html
> 
> Executive summary:
> * Git gives version control over files
> * Clojure code typically has lots of functions or other chunks of code
> in one file
> * This means you can't ask for the version of a single unit of code
> * Static analyses over the files as they vary through time, dumped
> into a database, yields interesting stuff
> 
> What they're calling "codeqs" ("code quantum") filetree folks would
> call a file, because filetree already splits everything (I think?)
> into bits, and versions everything at the "codeq" level by virtue of
> storing each bit in its own file: class definition, comment, method
> definition, etc.
> 
> So we already have most of this stuff already - I couldn't live
> without my in-image method versions - but I'm wondering if anyone else
> can spot anything worth copying?
> 
> Nah. They're basically figuring out how to extract the semantic changes from git, since git just treats the source code as opaque text. That gets them to what Monticello has now. I guess there's a bit of "imagine what you could do then!" that's unspecified.
> 
> Which is not to say that it's a bad idea. I'd love to create a huge database of, say, the update stream going back to the beginning, or the entire contents of squeaksource. But... then what?
> 
> Things that spring to mind immediately:
> 
> - universal senders and implementors
> - metrics like message sends per method or methods per class
> - detection of package dependencies
> - analysis of how long-lived packages change over time
> - analysis of contribution and collaboration between coders
> 
> and so on.
> 
> But, what good is it? Might be interesting, maybe there's some research papers to be written, but would it do us any good as a community? Would there be useful tools that came out of it? Would it be worth the effort? Hard to say.
> 
> Colin
> 


Wasn't this one of the goals Dale had for SqueakSource3?

- Bert -


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20130107/374929c7/attachment-0001.htm