Software Code Quality Of Apache Analyzed 442
fruey writes "Following Reasoning's February analysis of the Linux TCP/IP stack (putting it ahead of many commercial implementations for it's low error density), they recently pitted Apache 2.1 source code against commercial web server offerings, although they don't say which. Apparently, Apache is close, but no cigar..."
So if they found them... (Score:5, Funny)
It's not fair! (Score:5, Funny)
their own code? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Code defects appear to be a small part of the e (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Defect? (Score:2, Funny)
I guess would be quite a good example.
Re:Apache 2.1...? (Score:2, Funny)
BSD codestyle... (Score:3, Funny)
The defect density of the Apache code inspected was 0.53 per thousand lines of source code...
We can bring this number down to 0.2 by avoiding the BSD style guidlines. No kiddings, have you seen the density of MFC code?
BSD code:
char*
foo(int bar, double baz)
{
return bar + random();
}
MS code:
char* Foo(int nBar, double dBaz) { return bar + random() + m_ExtraWindowsBugModifier(); }
Apostrophe abuse (Score:2, Funny)
Re:FACT: 3 is a larger number than 2 (Score:1, Funny)
If Apache is so poor in quality... (Score:5, Funny)
Of course it is Apache 1.3.23...
Recursion (Score:3, Funny)
In other news... I have begun testing (Score:5, Funny)
I compared this to my 'other' server, for now unnammed.
My 'other' server brought me coffee, 2 pieces toast, 2 eggs OVER EASY, 4 strips of bacon, *and* Smucker's Grape Jelly with nary a mistep, or hesitation. This other server smiled, asked how my wife was, and brought me a new fork when I dropped my first one.
Congratulations, Gloria! You win the 'great server' award!
This article isn't worth the 2 dollar tip.
Here's an idea (Score:5, Funny)
Well, seriously, I wouldn't put much in their obvious estimation.
Re:Bad Statistics... (Score:5, Funny)
39% of Slashdot readers already know that.
Re:It's not fair! (Score:5, Funny)
inklude
dephine
retern
brake... etc.
Re:Wait a second (Score:3, Funny)
every program. (Score:2, Funny)
-Every program can be at least one line shorter.
-Every program has a least x bug per xxx lines.
Conclusion:
The ideal program has no lines and no bugs.
and to prevent any insightful moddings of this post:
Yes, the design is more important than the quality of the software, ask MS about this.
Re:Recursion (Score:5, Funny)
A magazine reviewed the product. In their review they included a formal mathematical proof that such a program could never work. The vendor responded to the proof by saying that they would fix that problem in the next release!
Re:every program. (Score:1, Funny)
Except I heard it as:
Since every program contains at least one bug,
and further, every program can be reduced by one line.
Therefore, by induction, every program can be reduced to one line which doesn't work.
The proof is left as an exercise for the reader.
sco! (Score:2, Funny)
Thank you, Captain Obvious (Score:3, Funny)
Wow, next we'll learn how you shouldn't buy any Ford, GM, or Chrysler product in the first year of production.
Re:So if they found them... (Score:2, Funny)
Thanks for the reality slap. Years of LISP and Java have made me weak and flabby.
Re:what is a "software error"? (Score:3, Funny)
I Am Not A Single Horny Octupus?
Re:It's not fair! (Score:3, Funny)
This line gave me a good chuckle. I expect that most people did not even notice the grammatical error in a sentence talking about low error densities.
Note: The rules for its/it's are not covered in Bob's Quick Guide To The Apostrophe, You Idiots [angryflower.com] since the Guide covers nouns and 'it' is a pronoun.
Re:So if they found them... (Score:3, Funny)
Some people love the thrill of skydiving and opening their parachute 5 seconds before they hit the ground. Some people defy death by wrestling crocidiles bare handed. Others get a rush pushing 200 MPH going into a turn in a formula one race car.
Me, I get my adrenaline pumping by running code on the development branch.
-