TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Python Bite Is Without Venom | Dr Dobb's

2 点作者 felixr超过 11 年前

1 comment

Someone超过 11 年前
<i>&quot;Coverity gauges that since 2006, Python has achieved a defect density of .005 (or .005 defects per 1,000 lines of code) [...] To date, the Coverity Scan service has analyzed nearly 400,000 lines of Python code and identified 996 new defects — 860 of which have been fixed by the Python community,&quot;</i><p>I don&#x27;t understand that. 400,000 lines times .005&#x2F;1000, in my book, equals around 2 defects. Interpreting the 0.005 as the more reasonable &#x27;per line&#x27;, it would expect 2000 defects, not 1000. Does that mean there are 1000 other known defects in Python that Coverity did not find, or that they found, but ignored as not being new? Or did they check what fraction of known defects they found, and extrapolated from there to get an estimate for the number of not found defects?<p>Dr Dobbs copy-pasted their press release at <a href="http://www.coverity.com/company/press-releases/read/coverity-finds-python-sets-new-level-of-quality-for-open-source-software" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.coverity.com&#x2F;company&#x2F;press-releases&#x2F;read&#x2F;coverity...</a> and the report requires registration, so can anybody explain?