cocoaforge

Out of interest I checked on the size of the Adium project as of a few revisions ago.

Objective-C and headers (.h/.m): 1,312 files, containing 233,201 lines

C (.c): 6 files with 11,207 lines

PERL (.pl): 6 files, containing 934 lines

Property Lists (.plist): 109 files containing 4,833 lines

Total (counting only these file types): 1,433 files containing 250,175 lines

there are three types of people on these forums

1. the people that are .. kind to the second type of person and know something or alot about programing.

2. people that know nothing about programing but are computer savvy enough to describe their adiumx problems. (me)

3. People that are lame and make fun of the second type of person and claim they know something about programing.

and then there are people who dont search for topics on forums.. which i cant give a group to because i did that once and have since learned my lesson...


sooooo to get to the point... is that alot?

I'm 1 I guess…

But I mislead people…

Well, I know a bit of programming (not nearly enough to do anything significant with, though), and I could imagine that writing 205,175 lines of code would take quite a while, especially considering that you're going to be going back and editing a lot of those lines at some point or another.

I would say that's pretty healthy. A project is considered to be "big" when it has around a million lines of code. According to Wikipedia, Windows 3.1 had 3 million lines of code and Windows XP has 40 million. So given that Adium is just an IM client, they're not bad off.

Lines of Code (LoC) is not an indication of robustness. Mozilla has over a million LoC for its rendering engine, KHTML has about 15,000 LoC. Which did Apple go with - KHTML and its smaller codebase and footprint. IE has about 4 million LoC... that's as much as an operating system, which should indicate something

How much does Panther have?

FredAkbar wrote:How much does Panther have?

Rather, how much does Tiger have?

bgannin wrote:Lines of Code (LoC) is not an indication of robustness. Mozilla has over a million LoC for its rendering engine, KHTML has about 15,000 LoC. Which did Apple go with - KHTML and its smaller codebase and footprint. IE has about 4 million LoC... that's as much as an operating system, which should indicate something

LoC is also unfair; they might be really short or really long (do they count returns as lines?)

zaudragon wrote:LoC is also unfair; they might be really short or really long (do they count returns as lines?)

True, LoC is a disputable measure. However, I don't think the big difference between Mozilla and KHTML comes down to Mozilla having a lot of really short comments.

zaudragon wrote:

bgannin wrote:Lines of Code (LoC) is not an indication of robustness. Mozilla has over a million LoC for its rendering engine, KHTML has about 15,000 LoC. Which did Apple go with - KHTML and its smaller codebase and footprint. IE has about 4 million LoC... that's as much as an operating system, which should indicate something

LoC is also unfair; they might be really short or really long (do they count returns as lines?)

And as we know from the leaked source code, 20% of MS' code is "HACK INSERTED HERE"...

bgannin wrote:Lines of Code (LoC) is not an indication of robustness. Mozilla has over a million LoC for its rendering engine, KHTML has about 15,000 LoC. Which did Apple go with - KHTML and its smaller codebase and footprint. IE has about 4 million LoC... that's as much as an operating system, which should indicate something

good perspective

bgannin wrote:Lines of Code (LoC) is not an indication of robustness. Mozilla has over a million LoC for its rendering engine, KHTML has about 15,000 LoC. Which did Apple go with - KHTML and its smaller codebase and footprint. IE has about 4 million LoC... that's as much as an operating system, which should indicate something

...And they still can't get IE to work right.

On a related note, did anybody else see this article?
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/01/micr ... yware.html

I think that it sums up IE and MS nicely.

air__devil wrote:...And they still can't get IE to work right.

On a related note, did anybody else see this article?
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/01/micr ... yware.html

I think that it sums up IE and MS nicely.

ohh man, i nearly peed my pants

Edit: spybot S&D = the best, MS should just pay those guys a gazillion bucks... least it will work right

SuperJeremy3000 wrote:

air__devil wrote:...And they still can't get IE to work right.

On a related note, did anybody else see this article?
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/01/micr ... yware.html

I think that it sums up IE and MS nicely.

ohh man, i nearly peed my pants

Edit: spybot S&D = the best, MS should just pay those guys a gazillion bucks... least it will work right

Wrong!
It can't remove IE!