Fun with Google CodePro

Usually when a software tool has “Pro” in the name, it means that it is expensive. Sometimes it just means that the features are unlocked so that you can actually use the tool. In this case it means FREE.

I have used CodePro on another project, but started using it again to help analyze the Stanford Natural Language Parser (also free).  I would like to use the StanfordNLP in a side project that I have in mind.  The problem is that is has a large code base in a domain (language parsing) that I am not familiar with.

I will have to split this into multiple posts, but you can read about the metrics report below.

To start with, I created a plugin that includes the source for the NLP.  An initial run of the CodePro metrics report gave me this:

This document contains the results of running metrics for edu.stanford.nlp.fsm, edu.stanford.nlp.international, edu.stanford.nlp.international.arabic, edu.stanford.nlp.international.arabic.pipeline, edu.stanford.nlp.international.arabic.pipeline.configurations, edu.stanford.nlp.international.arabic.pipeline.splits, edu.stanford.nlp.international.french, edu.stanford.nlp.international.french.pipeline, edu.stanford.nlp.international.french.pipeline.configurations, edu.stanford.nlp.international.morph, edu.stanford.nlp.international.process, edu.stanford.nlp.io, edu.stanford.nlp.io.ui, edu.stanford.nlp.ling, edu.stanford.nlp.math, edu.stanford.nlp.misc, edu.stanford.nlp.movetrees, edu.stanford.nlp.objectbank, edu.stanford.nlp.parser, edu.stanford.nlp.parser.lexparser, edu.stanford.nlp.parser.lexparser.demo, edu.stanford.nlp.parser.metrics, edu.stanford.nlp.parser.tools, edu.stanford.nlp.parser.ui, edu.stanford.nlp.process, edu.stanford.nlp.stats, edu.stanford.nlp.swing, edu.stanford.nlp.trees, edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.arabic, edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.french, edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.hebrew, edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.negra, edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.pennchinese, edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.tuebadz, edu.stanford.nlp.trees.tregex, edu.stanford.nlp.trees.tregex.tsurgeon, edu.stanford.nlp.util, edu.stanford.nlp.util.concurrent at 10/21/11 11:22 PM.

Global Results

Metric Name Value
Abstractness 9.7%
Average Block Depth 1.22
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.90
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 10.69
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.75
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.93
Average Number of Methods Per Type 4.88
Average Number of Parameters 0.99
Comments Ratio 7.5%
Efferent Couplings 785
Lines of Code 141,954
Number of Characters 8,531,616
Number of Comments 10,697
Number of Constructors 857
Number of Fields 3,436
Number of Lines 188,029
Number of Methods 5,521
Number of Packages 38
Number of Semicolons 40,752
Number of Types 1,130
Weighted Methods 18,798

Results for StanfordNLP

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Block Depth 1.22
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.90
Weighted Methods 18,798

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.fsm

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.07
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.88
Comments Ratio 12%
Number of Methods 92
Number of Semicolons 617
Average Number of Methods Per Type 5.41
Number of Constructors 15
Abstractness 29.4%
Lines of Code 1,069
Number of Characters 44,999
Number of Comments 129
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 9.14
Number of Lines 1,426
Number of Fields 29
Number of Types 17
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.12
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.52
Weighted Methods 227
Average Block Depth 1.31

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.international

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.66
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.50
Comments Ratio 4%
Number of Methods 3
Number of Semicolons 26
Average Number of Methods Per Type 1.50
Number of Constructors 1
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 49
Number of Characters 1,812
Number of Comments 2
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 7.75
Number of Lines 68
Number of Fields 7
Number of Types 2
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.50
Average Number of Fields Per Type 3.00
Weighted Methods 10
Average Block Depth 1.00
Efferent Couplings 1

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.international.arabic

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.15
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.66
Comments Ratio 9.6%
Number of Methods 13
Number of Semicolons 205
Average Number of Methods Per Type 4.33
Number of Constructors 2
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 406
Number of Characters 20,438
Number of Comments 39
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 20.26
Number of Lines 580
Number of Fields 29
Number of Types 3
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 7.73
Average Number of Fields Per Type 3.33
Weighted Methods 116
Average Block Depth 1.54
Efferent Couplings 3

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.international.arabic.pipeline

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.17
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.00
Comments Ratio 12.4%
Number of Methods 28
Number of Semicolons 388
Average Number of Methods Per Type 3.50
Number of Constructors 8
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 629
Number of Characters 31,598
Number of Comments 78
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 12.69
Number of Lines 959
Number of Fields 53
Number of Types 8
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 4.16
Average Number of Fields Per Type 3.37
Weighted Methods 150
Average Block Depth 1.11
Efferent Couplings 8

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.international.french

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.25
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.00
Comments Ratio 4.2%
Number of Methods 4
Number of Semicolons 93
Average Number of Methods Per Type 4.00
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 163
Number of Characters 6,893
Number of Comments 7
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 37.00
Number of Lines 229
Number of Fields 4
Number of Types 1
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 13.50
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.00
Weighted Methods 54
Average Block Depth 2.25
Efferent Couplings 1

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.international.french.pipeline

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.53
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.60
Comments Ratio 7.6%
Number of Methods 15
Number of Semicolons 248
Average Number of Methods Per Type 3.00
Number of Constructors 3
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 458
Number of Characters 21,802
Number of Comments 35
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 18.77
Number of Lines 650
Number of Fields 16
Number of Types 5
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 4.16
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.00
Weighted Methods 75
Average Block Depth 2.00
Efferent Couplings 4

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.international.morph

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.80
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.00
Comments Ratio 12%
Number of Methods 15
Number of Semicolons 51
Average Number of Methods Per Type 5.00
Number of Constructors 3
Abstractness 33.3%
Lines of Code 91
Number of Characters 5,008
Number of Comments 11
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 3.72
Number of Lines 172
Number of Fields 18
Number of Types 3
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.27
Average Number of Fields Per Type 4.66
Weighted Methods 23
Average Block Depth 0.85
Efferent Couplings 2

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.international.process

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.83
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.60
Comments Ratio 10.9%
Number of Methods 36
Number of Semicolons 379
Average Number of Methods Per Type 3.60
Number of Constructors 6
Abstractness 30%
Lines of Code 596
Number of Characters 33,005
Number of Comments 65
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 10.69
Number of Lines 941
Number of Fields 88
Number of Types 10
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.64
Average Number of Fields Per Type 3.90
Weighted Methods 111
Average Block Depth 0.77
Efferent Couplings 9

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.io

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.10
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.29
Comments Ratio 10.6%
Number of Methods 117
Number of Semicolons 627
Average Number of Methods Per Type 6.88
Number of Constructors 22
Abstractness 5.8%
Lines of Code 1,264
Number of Characters 66,902
Number of Comments 134
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 9.11
Number of Lines 2,240
Number of Fields 33
Number of Types 17
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.04
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.52
Weighted Methods 284
Average Block Depth 1.40
Efferent Couplings 13

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.io.ui

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.72
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.12
Comments Ratio 19.2%
Number of Methods 22
Number of Semicolons 85
Average Number of Methods Per Type 2.75
Number of Constructors 1
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 151
Number of Characters 6,616
Number of Comments 29
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 6.86
Number of Lines 222
Number of Fields 14
Number of Types 8
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.06
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.37
Weighted Methods 34
Average Block Depth 0.73
Efferent Couplings 1

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.ling

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.49
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.33
Comments Ratio 19.8%
Number of Methods 430
Number of Semicolons 1,048
Average Number of Methods Per Type 2.00
Number of Constructors 72
Abstractness 6.9%
Lines of Code 2,709
Number of Characters 171,522
Number of Comments 537
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 3.97
Number of Lines 5,874
Number of Fields 155
Number of Types 215
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.26
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.38
Weighted Methods 636
Average Block Depth 1.00
Efferent Couplings 196

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.math

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.69
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.00
Comments Ratio 10%
Number of Methods 186
Number of Semicolons 1,084
Average Number of Methods Per Type 93.00
Number of Constructors 2
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 1,780
Number of Characters 75,194
Number of Comments 179
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 9.37
Number of Lines 2,611
Number of Fields 3
Number of Types 2
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.75
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.00
Weighted Methods 517
Average Block Depth 1.96
Efferent Couplings 2

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.misc

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.80
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.00
Comments Ratio 0.8%
Number of Methods 5
Number of Semicolons 57
Average Number of Methods Per Type 5.00
Number of Constructors 1
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 112
Number of Characters 4,131
Number of Comments 1
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 17.83
Number of Lines 135
Number of Types 1
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 4.83
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.00
Weighted Methods 29
Average Block Depth 2.50
Efferent Couplings 1

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.movetrees

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.76
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.66
Comments Ratio 11.3%
Number of Methods 13
Number of Semicolons 37
Average Number of Methods Per Type 4.33
Number of Constructors 2
Abstractness 33.3%
Lines of Code 79
Number of Characters 3,353
Number of Comments 9
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 4.79
Number of Lines 146
Number of Fields 5
Number of Types 3
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.13
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.00
Weighted Methods 17
Average Block Depth 0.88
Efferent Couplings 2

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.objectbank

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.89
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.66
Comments Ratio 15.1%
Number of Methods 65
Number of Semicolons 275
Average Number of Methods Per Type 5.41
Number of Constructors 20
Abstractness 16.6%
Lines of Code 588
Number of Characters 36,244
Number of Comments 89
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 5.74
Number of Lines 1,143
Number of Fields 29
Number of Types 12
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.63
Average Number of Fields Per Type 2.25
Weighted Methods 139
Average Block Depth 1.00
Efferent Couplings 11

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.parser

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.55
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.00
Comments Ratio 48.1%
Number of Methods 9
Number of Semicolons 19
Average Number of Methods Per Type 2.25
Abstractness 100%
Lines of Code 27
Number of Characters 5,595
Number of Comments 13
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 1.00
Number of Lines 163
Number of Types 4
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.00
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.00
Weighted Methods 9
Average Block Depth 0.00
Efferent Couplings 4

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.parser.lexparser

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.07
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.01
Comments Ratio 14.3%
Number of Methods 1,046
Number of Semicolons 12,645
Average Number of Methods Per Type 7.26
Number of Constructors 146
Abstractness 9.7%
Lines of Code 21,281
Number of Characters 1,149,632
Number of Comments 3,048
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 16.19
Number of Lines 30,729
Number of Fields 989
Number of Types 144
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 4.44
Average Number of Fields Per Type 5.56
Weighted Methods 5,313
Average Block Depth 1.17
Efferent Couplings 119

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.parser.lexparser.demo

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.19
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.50
Comments Ratio 7.1%
Number of Methods 5
Number of Semicolons 88
Average Number of Methods Per Type 2.50
Number of Constructors 1
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 126
Number of Characters 5,530
Number of Comments 9
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 16.33
Number of Lines 157
Number of Types 2
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.33
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.00
Weighted Methods 8
Average Block Depth 1.83
Efferent Couplings 2

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.parser.metrics

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.65
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.36
Comments Ratio 7.5%
Number of Methods 55
Number of Semicolons 802
Average Number of Methods Per Type 5.00
Number of Constructors 15
Abstractness 9%
Lines of Code 1,236
Number of Characters 59,861
Number of Comments 93
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 14.74
Number of Lines 1,774
Number of Fields 69
Number of Types 11
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 3.54
Average Number of Fields Per Type 5.45
Weighted Methods 248
Average Block Depth 1.09
Efferent Couplings 11

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.parser.tools

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.00
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.00
Comments Ratio 6.3%
Number of Methods 1
Number of Semicolons 32
Average Number of Methods Per Type 1.00
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 47
Number of Characters 3,353
Number of Comments 3
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 23.00
Number of Lines 91
Number of Fields 17
Number of Types 1
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 13.00
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.00
Weighted Methods 13
Average Block Depth 1.00
Efferent Couplings 1

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.parser.ui

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.98
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.30
Comments Ratio 20.2%
Number of Methods 76
Number of Semicolons 602
Average Number of Methods Per Type 2.92
Number of Constructors 8
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 967
Number of Characters 48,923
Number of Comments 196
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 10.65
Number of Lines 1,392
Number of Fields 75
Number of Types 26
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.68
Average Number of Fields Per Type 2.34
Weighted Methods 195
Average Block Depth 0.80
Efferent Couplings 6

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.process

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.01
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.37
Comments Ratio 0.9%
Number of Methods 269
Number of Semicolons 3,216
Average Number of Methods Per Type 7.27
Number of Constructors 51
Abstractness 24.3%
Lines of Code 72,032
Number of Characters 4,623,388
Number of Comments 717
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 16.23
Number of Lines 75,345
Number of Fields 315
Number of Types 37
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 5.57
Average Number of Fields Per Type 4.32
Weighted Methods 1,783
Average Block Depth 1.07
Efferent Couplings 29

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.stats

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.07
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.51
Comments Ratio 14.2%
Number of Methods 574
Number of Semicolons 2,279
Average Number of Methods Per Type 9.56
Number of Constructors 31
Abstractness 11.6%
Lines of Code 4,472
Number of Characters 236,315
Number of Comments 636
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 8.23
Number of Lines 7,504
Number of Fields 107
Number of Types 60
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.55
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.45
Weighted Methods 941
Average Block Depth 1.29
Efferent Couplings 18

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.swing

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.00
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.00
Comments Ratio 7.8%
Number of Methods 3
Number of Semicolons 26
Average Number of Methods Per Type 3.00
Number of Constructors 1
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 51
Number of Characters 2,299
Number of Comments 4
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 9.25
Number of Lines 79
Number of Fields 4
Number of Types 1
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.50
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.00
Weighted Methods 10
Average Block Depth 2.50
Efferent Couplings 1

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.97
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.78
Comments Ratio 18.1%
Number of Methods 825
Number of Semicolons 5,411
Average Number of Methods Per Type 4.02
Number of Constructors 160
Abstractness 11.2%
Lines of Code 11,179
Number of Characters 747,922
Number of Comments 2,028
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 9.91
Number of Lines 21,159
Number of Fields 382
Number of Types 205
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.77
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.96
Weighted Methods 2,742
Average Block Depth 1.36
Efferent Couplings 107

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.arabic

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.55
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.53
Comments Ratio 17%
Number of Methods 77
Number of Semicolons 530
Average Number of Methods Per Type 5.13
Number of Constructors 23
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 941
Number of Characters 54,755
Number of Comments 160
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 7.50
Number of Lines 1,688
Number of Fields 79
Number of Types 15
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.16
Average Number of Fields Per Type 3.13
Weighted Methods 217
Average Block Depth 0.97
Efferent Couplings 11

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.french

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.63
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.90
Comments Ratio 18.9%
Number of Methods 30
Number of Semicolons 318
Average Number of Methods Per Type 3.00
Number of Constructors 9
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 506
Number of Characters 29,821
Number of Comments 96
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 10.89
Number of Lines 913
Number of Fields 33
Number of Types 10
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.94
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.70
Weighted Methods 115
Average Block Depth 1.32
Efferent Couplings 7

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.hebrew

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.35
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.25
Comments Ratio 9.3%
Number of Methods 14
Number of Semicolons 65
Average Number of Methods Per Type 3.50
Number of Constructors 1
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 118
Number of Characters 5,486
Number of Comments 11
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 5.33
Number of Lines 191
Number of Fields 10
Number of Types 4
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.80
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.25
Weighted Methods 27
Average Block Depth 1.00
Efferent Couplings 4

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.negra

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.76
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.60
Comments Ratio 17.7%
Number of Methods 72
Number of Semicolons 485
Average Number of Methods Per Type 7.20
Number of Constructors 16
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 877
Number of Characters 45,162
Number of Comments 156
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 8.45
Number of Lines 1,505
Number of Fields 69
Number of Types 10
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.31
Average Number of Fields Per Type 3.29
Weighted Methods 204
Average Block Depth 1.11
Efferent Couplings 8

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.pennchinese

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.74
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.45
Comments Ratio 19.6%
Number of Methods 93
Number of Semicolons 1,088
Average Number of Methods Per Type 1.30
Number of Constructors 32
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 2,372
Number of Characters 278,817
Number of Comments 467
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 11.56
Number of Lines 4,286
Number of Fields 157
Number of Types 71
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.75
Average Number of Fields Per Type 0.46
Weighted Methods 344
Average Block Depth 1.44
Efferent Couplings 70

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.tuebadz

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.65
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 2.25
Comments Ratio 23.9%
Number of Methods 29
Number of Semicolons 185
Average Number of Methods Per Type 7.25
Number of Constructors 9
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 334
Number of Characters 19,874
Number of Comments 80
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 7.34
Number of Lines 558
Number of Fields 24
Number of Types 4
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.86
Average Number of Fields Per Type 4.75
Weighted Methods 71
Average Block Depth 1.07
Efferent Couplings 4

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.tregex

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.10
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.59
Comments Ratio 9.9%
Number of Methods 302
Number of Semicolons 2,105
Average Number of Methods Per Type 3.51
Number of Constructors 51
Abstractness 5.8%
Lines of Code 4,417
Number of Characters 189,118
Number of Comments 439
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 12.71
Number of Lines 6,190
Number of Fields 244
Number of Types 86
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 3.20
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.83
Weighted Methods 1,165
Average Block Depth 1.11
Efferent Couplings 29

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.tregex.tsurgeon

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 1.05
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.59
Comments Ratio 9.1%
Number of Methods 176
Number of Semicolons 1,815
Average Number of Methods Per Type 5.50
Number of Constructors 51
Abstractness 12.5%
Lines of Code 3,320
Number of Characters 140,471
Number of Comments 303
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 12.93
Number of Lines 4,466
Number of Fields 160
Number of Types 32
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 3.45
Average Number of Fields Per Type 4.00
Weighted Methods 911
Average Block Depth 1.24
Efferent Couplings 30

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.util

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.98
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 0.93
Comments Ratio 11.9%
Number of Methods 812
Number of Semicolons 3,789
Average Number of Methods Per Type 8.28
Number of Constructors 92
Abstractness 15.3%
Lines of Code 7,427
Number of Characters 351,349
Number of Comments 886
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 7.77
Number of Lines 12,294
Number of Fields 215
Number of Types 98
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 2.25
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.12
Weighted Methods 2,045
Average Block Depth 1.33
Efferent Couplings 69

Results for edu.stanford.nlp.util.concurrent

  [top]
Metric Name Value
Average Number of Parameters 0.55
Average Number of Constructors Per Type 1.00
Comments Ratio 10%
Number of Methods 9
Number of Semicolons 32
Average Number of Methods Per Type 4.50
Number of Constructors 2
Abstractness 0%
Lines of Code 80
Number of Characters 4,428
Number of Comments 8
Average Lines Of Code Per Method 7.00
Number of Lines 149
Number of Fields 4
Number of Types 2
Average Cyclomatic Complexity 1.36
Average Number of Fields Per Type 1.50
Weighted Methods 15
Average Block Depth 1.53
Efferent Couplings 1

Violation Summary

Metric Name Value
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.ling 215
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Efferent Couplings for edu.stanford.nlp.ling 196
    Exceeds the maximum value of 20
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.parser.lexparser 144
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Efferent Couplings for edu.stanford.nlp.parser.lexparser 119
    Exceeds the maximum value of 20
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.process 37
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Efferent Couplings for edu.stanford.nlp.process 29
    Exceeds the maximum value of 20
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.stats 60
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.trees 205
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Efferent Couplings for edu.stanford.nlp.trees 107
    Exceeds the maximum value of 20
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.pennchinese 71
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Efferent Couplings for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.international.pennchinese 70
    Exceeds the maximum value of 20
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.tregex 86
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Efferent Couplings for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.tregex 29
    Exceeds the maximum value of 20
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.tregex.tsurgeon 32
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Efferent Couplings for edu.stanford.nlp.trees.tregex.tsurgeon 30
    Exceeds the maximum value of 20
Number of Types for edu.stanford.nlp.util 98
    Exceeds the maximum value of 30
Efferent Couplings for edu.stanford.nlp.util 69
    Exceeds the maximum value of 20
Generated at 10/21/11 11:22 PM Powered by CodePro Server

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *