Performance Evaluation of Platforms Using Software Metrics

Authors

  • KS Aparna Department of Computer Science and engineering, RYMEC, VTU, Ballari, India
  • Vaibhav Kumar K Department of Computer Science and engineering, RYMEC, VTU, Ballari, India
  • Sushmitha G Department of Computer Science and engineering, RYMEC, VTU, Ballari, India
  • Vanam Saikiran Department of Computer Science and engineering, RYMEC, VTU, Ballari, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26438/ijcse/v8i5.178181

Keywords:

metrics, Cyclomatic complexity number (CCN), Number of lines of code (NLOC), Analyzer (developed tool), parameter-coun, token-count

Abstract

In this paper, the quality of software and its performance is evaluated using software metrics. The software product estimation is purely based on software metrics and is being applied on java and python platforms. Number of lines of code (NLOC), Cyclomatic complexity number (CCN), Token count and parameter count have been utilized to analyze the complexity of a program. The application is developed to test the codes of two different platforms and their complexities are compared using doubly linked list program as an example. The results are recorded and compared based on these software metrics to uncover the vary in results for similar projects. The paper is divided into five sections. In section one we are discussing about software metrics and it's importance in deciding the performance of different programming platforms. In section two we are discussing about different software metrics that are used to evaluate the performance of the programs. In section 3 we are discussing the previous works and related works. In section four we are taking an example and trying to evaluate the performance of the programs that are written in java and python languages and discussing about the results. In section five we are discussing about the future work and the conclusion of our developed tool.

References

[1] H. Barkmann, R. Lincke, and W. Löwe. “Evaluation of Software Quality Metrics In Open-Source Projects”. In Proceedings of The 2009 IEEE International Workshop on Quantitative Evaluation of large-scale Systems and Technologies (QuEST09), Bradford, UK, 26-29th May 2009.

[2] Yasunar Takai, Takashi Kobayashi, kiyoshi Agus ”Software Metrics based on Coding Standards Violations”, In Proc. the Joint Conference of the 21th International Workshop on Software Measurement and the 6th International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement (IWSM/MENSURA2011) pp.273-278, Nara, Japan, 3-4 Nov. 2011.

[3] Paul A. Judas, Lorraine E. Prokop. “A historical compilation of software metrics with applicability to NASA`s Orion spacecraft flight software sizing”. ISSE 7(3): 161-170 (2011).

[4] Yuming Z., Baowen X. “Predicting the Maintainability of Open Source Software Using Design Metrics”. Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences, Vol. 13 No.1, PP 14-20. 2008.

[5] S Pradeep, Chaudhary K D and V Shrish. "An Investigation of the Relationships between Software Metrics and Defects". International Journal of Computer Applications 28(8):13-17, August 2011. Foundation of Computer Science, New York, USA.US

[6] M.Karanam, L.Gottemukkala “Software Fault Detection Using Improved Relief Detection Method”,Vol 4, Issue 5, pp.1-4, October 2016.

[7] A. Fitzsimmons and T. Love, “A review and evaluation of software science,” Computing Survey, vol. 10, no. 1, March 1978.

[8] S. D. Conte, H. E Dunsmore, and V. Y. Shen, “ Software engineering metrics and models” Benjamin/ Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., 1986.

[9] B. A. Nejmeh, “NPATH: A measure of execution path complexity and its applications,” Comm. of the ACM, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 188-210, February 1988.

[10] T.A. McCabe, “A complexity measure,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 308-320, December 1976.

[11] Woodward, Hennell, M.A., and Heldey, D.A.: “A measure of control flow complexity in program text‟, lEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1979, 5, (1). pp. 45 - 50.

[12] Hall, N.R., and Preiser, S.: ‟Combined network complexity measures”, IBM Journal of Research & Development, 1984, 28, (I), pp. 15 – 27.

[13] Aanchal, Sonu Kumar “Metrics for software components in object oriented environments: A survey”, Vol 1, Issue 2, march-april-2013.

[14] Wiener, R., and , R.: ‟Software engineering with Modula-2 and Ada” (Wiley, 1984).

[15] Dahl, O.J., Dijkstra, E.W., and Hoare, C.A.R.: “Structured programming” (Academic Press, 1972).

[16] Dijkstra, E.W.:„Goto statement considered harmful‟, Communications of ACM, 1968, 18, (8), pp. 453 – 457.

[17] O, Omidiora. E.O, Balogin M.O. “A complexity metric for multi-paradigm programming languages”, vol.4, No.12, December 2014.

[18] Ermiyas Birihanu Belachew, Feidu Akmel Gobena, Shumet Tadesse Nigatu,”Analysis of software quality using software metrics”, vol.8, No.4/5, October 2018.

[19] Gurudev Singh, Dilbag Singh, Vikram Singh “A study of software metrics” vol.11, January 2011.

[20] Neha saini, Sapna kharwar, Anushree Agarwal,”A Study of significant software metrics”,vol.3, No.12, July 2014.

Downloads

Published

2020-05-31
CITATION
DOI: 10.26438/ijcse/v8i5.178181
Published: 2020-05-31

How to Cite

[1]
K. Aparna, V. K. K, S. G, and V. Saikiran, “Performance Evaluation of Platforms Using Software Metrics”, Int. J. Comp. Sci. Eng., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 178–181, May 2020.

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 5 (2020): IJCSE May Edition

Section

Research Article

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors contributing to this journal agree to publish their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, allowing third parties to share their work (copy, distribute, transmit) and to adapt it, under the condition that the authors are given credit and that in the event of reuse or distribution, the terms of this license are made clear.