Skip to main content

Doing Code Reviews with Code Analyst

I mentioned earlier that I was at a developer strategy meeting last week (n fact, Markus was there too) - of course, I wasn't traveling at the time. One of the comments from that meeting was how it's very hard (read, impossible) to stick to manual code reviews. Code reviews are a great practice and certainly valuable but when push comes to shove, it's often one of the practices that seem to slip away in favor of getting things done.

Now, in Team System, you can set up all kinds of rules for checking code in to help manage this process but what can you do in FoxPro?

One idea that came to me was extending the VFPX Code Analyst tool to become "project" or "environment" specific. Yes, you can create a number of new rules to run within the code analyst and enable/disable them as needed but what would also be useful would be to allow different projects to have "different" sets of rules that they might apply to. Then set up a project hook so that when you BUILD the project, the rules automatically run, telling you what's good and what's bad.

In this sense, you now have an automated "code review" tool.

The default rules in Code Analyst handle a number of generic pieces like identifying areas for refactoring, or finding known gotchas like RETURNs within ENDWITH, similar lines of code, but consider project-specific types of rules: ensuring classes are based on a common class library, appropriate use of MESSAGEBOX, no compilation errors, etc - and the tool takes on a whole new benefit.

This is one of those things that I'm going to add to the "to do" list for the Code Analyst: built-in project hooks, and some useful project rules.

What type of rules would you want to see in your code?

VFPX - Home

Powered by ScribeFire.

Comments

VfpImaging said…
Hi Andrew,

Using the Project Hook is indeed a great idea.

Here are my suggestions:

Check on every event's method if there is either a NODEFAULT or a DODEFAULT() present.

Check for undeclared variables.

Thanks, and keep your great job !

Regards

Cesar

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people. There was an  article  recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’ Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have hi...

Friend vs Therapist vs LLM: Shades of Grey

The conversations with AI series brings up a single point and then compares it between different LLM engines. These types of conversations were one of the many contributing factors to my writing of " Towards Consciousness " that explores the benefits and issues of creating a conscious AI. In this scenario, I was interested in seeing how an LLM might differ from a friend or therapist on issues that may have nuanced responses or contexts. In doing so, I came up with an interesting discussion on shades of grey. My Premise: Is it a bit strange to be using an LLM as a sober second thought? Every time I walk down this path of “why use an LLM to do certain things”, I come back to the alternatives that people like to say. “Why not bring it up with a friend?” A friend typically has your back or will say whatever to support their own agenda. “A therapist?” That’s someone who is “trained” to be impartial. But a computer? A computer is impartial based on two logical outcomes. If you say ...