Patent Publication Number: US-6983446-B2

Title: Methods and systems for finding specific line of source code

Description:
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS 
   This application claims the benefit of the filing date of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/199,046, entitled “Software Development Tool,” filed on Apr. 21, 2000, and is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/680,063, entitled “Method and System for Developing Software,” filed on Oct. 4, 2000, which claims the benefit of the filing date of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/157,826, entitled “Visual Unified Modeling Language Development Tool,” filed on Oct. 5, 1999, and U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/199,046, entitled “Software Development Tool,” filed on Apr. 21, 2000; all of which are incorporated herein by reference. 
   The following identified U.S. patent applications are also relied upon and are incorporated by reference in this application: 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/680,065, entitled “Method And System For Displaying Changes Of Source Code,” filed on Oct. 4, 2000; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/680,030, entitled “Method And System For Generating, Applying, And Defining A Pattern,” filed on Oct. 4, 2000; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/680,064, entitled “Method And System For Collapsing A Graphical Representation Of Related Elements,” filed on Oct. 4, 2000; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/839,045, entitled “Methods and Systems for Generating Source Code for Object Oriented Elements,” and filed on the same date herewith; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/839,526, entitled “Methods and Systems for Relating Data Structures and Object Oriented Elements for Distributed Computing,” and filed on the same date herewith; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/839,645, entitled “Methods and Systems for Finding and Displaying Linked Objects,” and filed on the same date herewith; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/839,527, entitled “Methods and Systems for Animating the Interaction of Objects in an Object Oriented Program,” and filed on the same date herewith; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/839,646, entitled “Methods and Systems for Supporting and Deploying Distributed Computing Components,” and filed on the same date herewith; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/838,580, entitled “Diagrammatic Control of a Software in a Version Control System,” and filed on the same date herewith; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/838,578, entitled “Navigation Links in Generated Documentation,” and filed on the same date herewith; 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/839,644, entitled “Methods and Systems for Identifying Dependencies Between Object-Oriented Elements,” and filed on the same date herewith; and 
   U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/839,524, entitled “Methods and Systems for Relating a Data Definition File and a Data Model for Distributed Computing,” and filed on the same date herewith. 

   FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
   The present invention relates to a method and system for developing software. More particularly, the invention relates to a method and system for locating source code corresponding to a message from a verification tool. 
   BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
   Computer instructions are written in source code. Although a skilled programmer can understand source code to determine what the code is designed to accomplish, with highly complex software systems, a graphical representation or model of the source code is helpful to organize and visualize the structure and components of the system. Using models, the complex systems are easily identified, and the structural and behavioral patterns can be visualized and documented. 
   The well-known Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a general-purpose notational language for visualizing, specifying, constructing, and documenting complex software systems. UML is used to model systems ranging from business information systems to Web-based distributed systems, to real-time embedded systems. UML formalizes the notion that real-world objects are best modeled as self-contained entities that contain both data and functionality. UML is more clearly described in the following references, which are incorporated herein by reference: (1) Martin Fowler,  UML Distilled Second Edition: Applying the Standard Object Modeling Language , Addison-Wesley (1999); (2) Booch, Rumbaugh, and Jacobson,  The Unified Modeling Language User Guide , Addison-Wesley (1998); (3) Peter Coad, Jeff DeLuca, and Eric Lefebvre,  Java Modeling in Color with UML: Enterprise Components and Process , Prentice Hall (1999); and (4) Peter Coad, Mark Mayfield, and Jonathan Kern,  Java Design: Building Better Apps  &amp;  Applets  (2nd Ed.), Prentice Hall (1998). 
   As shown in  FIG. 1 , conventional software development tools  100  allow a programmer to view UML  102  while viewing source code  104 . The source code  104  is stored in a file, and a reverse engineering module  106  converts the source code  104  into a representation of the software project in a database or repository  108 . The software project comprises source code  104  in at least one file which, when compiled, forms a sequence of instructions to be run by the data processing system. The repository  108  generates the UML  102 . If any changes are made to the UML  102 , they are automatically reflected in the repository  108 , and a code generator  110  converts the representation in the repository  108  into source code  104 . Such software development tools  100 , however, do not synchronize the displays of the UML  102  and the source code  104 . Rather, the repository  108  stores the representation of the software project while the file stores the source code  104 . A modification in the UML  102  does not appear in the source code  104  unless the code generator  110  re-generates the source code  104  from the data in the repository  108 . When this occurs, the portion of the source code  104  that is not protected from being overwritten is rewritten. Similarly, any modifications made to the source code  104  do not appear in the UML  102  unless the reverse engineering module  106  updates the repository  108 . As a result, redundant information is stored in the repository  108  and the source code  104 . In addition, rather than making incremental changes to the source code  104 , conventional software development tools  100  rewrite the overall source code  104  when modifications are made to the UML  102 , resulting in wasted processing time. This type of manual, large-grained synchronization requires either human intervention, or a “batch” style process to try to keep the two views (the UML  102  and the source code  104 ) in sync. Unfortunately, this approach, adopted by many tools, leads to many undesirable side-effects; such as desired changes to the source code being overwritten by the tool. A further disadvantage with conventional software development tools  100  is that they are designed to only work in a single programming language. Thus, a tool  100  that is designed for Java™ programs cannot be utilized to develop a program in C++. There is a need in the art for a tool that avoids the limitations of these conventional software development tools. 
   SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
   Methods and systems consistent with the present invention provide an improved software development tool that overcomes the limitations of conventional software development tools. The improved software development tool of the present invention allows a developer to simultaneously view a graphical and a textual display of source code. The graphical and textual views are synchronized so that a modification in one view is automatically reflected in the other view. In addition, the software development tool is designed for use with more than one programming language. 
   The improved software development tool enables a developer to quickly determine the location of an error detected by a verification tool. Not only can the developer locate the specific line of source code, but the software development tool also displays the graphical representation of the source code corresponding to the message in a visually distinctive manner. This assists the developer in debugging the source code by allowing the developer to visually determine the location of the error. 
   In accordance with methods consistent with the present invention, a method is provided in a data processing system for developing source code. The method comprises the steps of receiving a message corresponding to a portion of the source code, and displaying the graphical representation of the portion of the source code corresponding to the message in a visually distinctive manner. 
   In accordance with methods consistent with the present invention, a method is provided in a data processing system for developing source code. The method comprises the steps of detecting an error in the source code, generating a message reflecting the error, and displaying the graphical representation of the portion of the source code corresponding to the message in a visually distinctive manner. 
   In accordance with articles of manufacture consistent with the present invention, a computer-readable medium is provided. The computer-readable medium contains instructions for controlling a data processing system to perform a method. The data processing system has source code. The method comprises the steps of receiving a message corresponding to a portion of the source code, and displaying the graphical representation of the portion of the source code corresponding to the message in a visually distinctive manner. 
   In accordance with articles of manufacture consistent with the present invention, a computer-readable medium is provided. The computer-readable medium contains instructions for controlling a data processing system to perform a method. The data processing system has source code. The method comprises the steps of detecting an error in the source code, generating a message reflecting the error, and displaying the graphical representation of the portion of the source code corresponding to the message in a visually distinctive manner. 
   Other systems, methods, features and advantages of the invention will be or will become apparent to one with skill in the art upon examination of the following figures and detailed description. It is intended that all such additional systems, methods, features and advantages be included within this description, be within the scope of the invention, and be protected by the accompanying claims. 

   
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
     The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate an implementation of the invention and, together with the description, serve to explain the advantages and principles of the invention. In the drawings, 
       FIG. 1  depicts a conventional software development tool; 
       FIG. 2  depicts an overview of a software development tool in accordance with methods and systems consistent with the present invention; 
       FIG. 3  depicts a data structure of the language-neutral representation created by the software development tool of  FIG. 2 ; 
       FIG. 4  depicts representative source code; 
       FIG. 5  depicts the data structure of the language-neutral representation of the source code of  FIG. 4 ; 
       FIG. 6  depicts a data processing system suitable for practicing the present invention; 
       FIG. 7  depicts an architectural overview of the software development tool of  FIG. 2 ; 
       FIG. 8  depicts a flow diagram of the steps performed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 ; 
       FIG. 9  depicts a flow diagram illustrating the update model step of  FIG. 8 ; 
       FIG. 10  depicts a flow diagram of the steps performed by the software development tool in  FIG. 2  when creating a class; 
       FIG. 11  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays a use case diagram of source code; 
       FIG. 12  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays both a class diagram and a textual view of source code; 
       FIG. 13  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays a sequence diagram of source code; 
       FIG. 14  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays a collaboration diagram of source code; 
       FIG. 15  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays a statechart diagram of source code; 
       FIG. 16  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays an activity diagram of source code; 
       FIG. 17  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays a component diagram of source code; 
       FIG. 18  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays a deployment diagram of source code; 
       FIG. 19A  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays a list of predefined criteria which the software development tool checks in the source code; 
       FIG. 19B  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays the definition of the criteria which the software development tool checks in the source code, and an example of source code which does not conform to the criteria; 
       FIG. 19C  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays an example of source code which conforms to the criteria which the software development tool checks in the source code; 
       FIGS. 20A and B  depict a flow diagram of the steps performed by the software development tool in  FIG. 2  when locating source code related to a message from a verification tool; 
       FIG. 21  depicts a user interface displayed by the software development tool depicted in  FIG. 2 , where the user interface displays a message from a verification tool; 
       FIG. 22  depicts the user interface in  FIG. 21  illustrating the selection of a message; and 
       FIG. 23  depicts the user interface in  FIG. 22  after the selection of a message. 
   

   DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
   Methods and systems consistent with the present invention provide an improved software development tool that creates a graphical representation of source code regardless of the programming language in which the code is written. In addition, the software development tool simultaneously reflects any modifications to the source code to both the display of the graphical representation as well as the textual display of the source code. 
   As depicted in  FIG. 2 , source code  202  is being displayed in both a graphical form  204  and a textual form  206 . In accordance with methods and systems consistent with the present invention, the improved software development tool generates a transient meta model (TMM)  200  which stores a language-neutral representation of the source code  202 . The graphical  204  and textual  206  representations of the source code  202  are generated from the language-neutral representation in the TMM  200 . Alternatively, the textual view  206  of the source code may be obtained directly from the source code file. Although modifications made on the displays  204  and  206  may appear to modify the displays  204  and  206 , in actuality all modifications are made directly to the source code  202  via an incremental code editor (ICE)  208 , and the TMM  200  is used to generate the modifications in both the graphical  204  and the textual  206  views from the modifications to the source code  202 . 
   The improved software development tool provides simultaneous round-trip engineering, i.e., the graphical representation  204  is synchronized with the textual representation  206 . Thus, if a change is made to the source code  202  via the graphical representation  204 , the textual representation  206  is updated automatically. Similarly, if a change is made to the source code  202  via the textual representation  206 , the graphical representation  204  is updated to remain synchronized. There is no repository, no batch code generation, and no risk of losing code. 
   The data structure  300  of the language-neutral representation is depicted in FIG.  3 . The data structure  300  comprises a Source Code Interface (SCI) model  302 , an SCI package  304 , an SCI class  306 , and an SCI member  308 . The SCI model  302  is the source code organized into packages. The SCI model  302  corresponds to a directory for a software project being developed by the user, and the SCI package  304  corresponds to a subdirectory. The software project comprises the source code in at least one file that is compiled to form a sequence of instructions to be run by a data processing system. The data processing system is discussed in detail below. As is well known in object-oriented programming, the class  306  is a category of objects which describes a group of objects with similar properties (attributes), common behavior (operations or methods), common relationships to other objects, and common semantics. The members  308  comprise attributes and/or operations. 
   For example, the data structure  500  for the source code  400  depicted in  FIG. 4  is depicted in FIG.  5 . UserInterface  402  is defined as a package  404 . Accordingly, UserInterface  402  is contained in SCI package  502 . Similarly, Bank  406 , which is defined as a class  408 , is contained in SCI class  504 , and Name  410  and Assets  412 , which are defined as attributes (strings  414 ), are contained in SCI members  506 . Since these elements are in the same project, all are linked. The data structure  500  also identifies the language in which the source code is written  508 , e.g., the Java™ programming language. 
     FIG. 6  depicts a data processing system  600  suitable for practicing methods and systems consistent with the present invention. Data processing system  600  comprises a memory  602 , a secondary storage device  604 , an I/O device  606 , and a processor  608 . Memory  602  includes the improved software development tool  610 . The software development tool  610  is used to develop a software project  612 , and create the TMM  200  in the memory  602 . The project  612  is stored in the secondary storage device  604  of the data processing system  600 . One skilled in the art will recognize that data processing system  600  may contain additional or different components. 
   Although aspects of the present invention are described as being stored in memory, one skilled in the art will appreciate that these aspects can also be stored on or read from other types of computer-readable media, such as secondary storage devices, like hard disks, floppy disks or CD-ROM; a carrier wave from a network, such as Internet; or other forms of RAM or ROM either currently known or later developed. 
     FIG. 7  illustrates an architectural overview of the improved software development tool  610 . The tool  610  comprises a core  700 , an open application program interface (API)  702 , and modules  704 . The core  700  includes a parser  706  and an ICE  208 . The parser  706  converts the source code into the language-neutral representation in the TMM, and the ICE  208  converts the text from the displays into source code. There are three main packages composing the API  702 : Integrated Development Environment (IDE)  708 ; Read-Write Interface (RWI)  710 ; and Source Code Interface (SCI)  712 . Each package includes corresponding subpackages. As is well known in the art, a package is a collection of attributes, notifications, operations, or behaviors that are treated as a single module or program unit. 
   IDE  708  is the API  702  needed to generate custom outputs based on information contained in a model. It is a read-only interface, i.e., the user can extract information from the model, but not change the model. IDE  708  provides the functionality related to the model&#39;s representation in IDE  708  and interaction with the user. Each package composing the IDE group has a description highlighting the areas of applicability of this concrete package. RWI  710  enables the user to go deeper into the architecture. Using RWI  710 , information can be extracted from and written to the models. RWI not only represents packages, classes and members, but it may also represent different diagrams (class diagrams, use case diagrams, sequence diagrams and others), links, notes, use cases, actors, states, etc. 
   SCI  712  is at the source code level, and allows the user to work with the source code almost independently of the language being used. 
   The improved software development tool of the present invention is used to develop source code in a project. The project comprises a plurality of files and the source code of a chosen one of the plurality of files is written in a given language. The software development tool determines the language of the source code of the chosen file, converts the source code from the language into a language-neutral representation, uses the language-neutral representation to textually display the source code of the chosen file in the language, and uses the language-neutral representation to display a graphical representation of at least a portion of the project. The source code and the graphical representation are displayed simultaneously. 
   The improved software development tool of the present invention is also used to develop source code. The software development tool receives an indication of a selected language for the source code, creates a file to store the source code in the selected language, converts the source code from the selected language into a language-neutral representation, uses the language-neutral representation to display the source code of the file, and uses the language-neutral representation to display a graphical representation of the file. Again, the source code and the graphical representation are displayed simultaneously. 
   Moreover, if the source code in the file is modified, the modified source code and a graphical representation of at least a portion of the modified source code are displayed simultaneously. The QA module of the software development tool provides an error message if the modification does not conform to predefined or user-defined styles, as described above. The modification to the source code may be received by the software development tool via the programmer editing the source code in the textual pane or the graphical pane, or via some other independent software tool that the programmer uses to modify the code. The graphical representation of the project may be in Unified Modeling Language; however, one skilled in the art will recognize that other graphical representations of the source code may be displayed. Further, although the present invention is described and shown using the various views of the UML, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that other views may be displayed. 
     FIG. 8  depicts a flow diagram of the steps performed by the software development tool to develop a project in accordance with methods and systems consistent with the present invention. As previously stated, the project comprises a plurality of files. The developer either uses the software development tool to open a file that contains existing source code, or to create a file in which the source code will be developed. If the software development tool is used to open the file, determined in step  800 , the software development tool initially determines the programming language in which the code is written (step  802 ). The language is identified by the extension of the file, e.g., “java” identifies source code written in the Java™ language, while “.cpp” identifies source code written in C++. The software development tool then obtains a template for the current programming language, i.e., a collection of generalized definitions for the particular language that can be used to build the data structure (step  804 ). For example, the templates used to define a new Java™ class contains a default name, e.g., “Class1,” and the default code, “public class Class1 { }.” Such templates are well known in the art. For example, the “Microsoft Foundation Class Library” and the “Microsoft Word Template For Business Use Case Modeling” are examples of standard template libraries from which programmers can choose individual template classes. The software development tool uses the template to parse the source code (step  806 ), and create the data structure (step  808 ). After creating the data structure or if there is no existing code, the software development tool awaits an event, i.e., a modification or addition to the source code by the developer (step  810 ). If an event is received and the event is to close the file (step  812 ), the file is saved (step  814 ) and closed (step  816 ). Otherwise, the software development tool performs the event (step  818 ), i.e., the tool makes the modification. The software development tool then updates the TMM or model (step  820 ), as discussed in detail below, and updates both the graphical and the textual views (step  822 ). 
     FIG. 9  depicts a flow diagram illustrating the update model step of FIG.  8 . The software development tool selects a file from the project (step  900 ), and determines whether the file is new (step  902 ), whether the file has been updated (step  904 ), or whether the file has been deleted (step  906 ). If the file is new, the software development tool adds the additional symbols from the file to the TMM (step  908 ). To add the symbol to the TMM, the software development tool uses the template to parse the symbol to the TMM. If the file has been updated, the software development tool updates the symbols in the TMM (step  910 ). Similar to the addition of a symbol to the TMM, the software development tool uses the template to parse the symbol to the TMM. If the file has been deleted, the software development tool deletes the symbols in the TMM (step  912 ). The software development tool continues this analysis for all files in the project. After all files are analyzed (step  914 ), any obsolete symbols in the TMM (step  916 ) are deleted (step  918 ). 
     FIG. 10  depicts a flow diagram illustrating the performance of an event, specifically the creation of a class, in accordance with methods and systems consistent with the present invention. After identifying the programming language (step  1000 ), the software development tool obtains a template for the language (step  1002 ), creates a source code file in the project directory (step  1004 ), and pastes the template onto the TMM (step  1006 ). The project directory corresponds to the SCI model  302  of FIG.  3 . Additional events which a developer may perform using the software development tool include the creation, modification or deletion of packages, projects, attributes, interfaces, links, operations, and the closing of a file. 
   Applications to be developed using the software development tool are collectively broken into three views of the application: the static view, the dynamic view, and the functional view. The static view is modeled using the use-case and class diagrams. A use case diagram  1100 , depicted in  FIG. 11 , shows the relationship among actors  1102  and use cases  1104  within the system  1106 . A class diagram  1200 , depicted in  FIG. 12  with its associated source code  1202 , on the other hand, includes classes  1204 , interfaces, packages and their relationships connected as a graph to each other and to their contents. 
   The dynamic view is modeled using the sequence, collaboration and statechart diagrams. As depicted in  FIG. 13 , a sequence diagram  1300  represents an interaction, which is a set of messages  1302  exchanged among objects  1304  within a collaboration to effect a desired operation or result. In a sequence diagram  1300 , the vertical dimension represents time and the horizontal dimension represents different objects. A collaboration diagram  1500 , depicted in  FIG. 15 , is also an interaction with messages  1502  exchanged among objects  1504 , but it is also a collaboration, which is a set of objects  1504  related in a particular context. Contrary to sequence diagrams  1300  (FIG.  13 ), which emphasize the time ordering of messages along the vertical axis, collaboration diagrams  1400  ( FIG. 14 ) emphasize the structural organization of objects. 
   A statechart diagram  1500  is depicted in FIG.  15 . The statechart diagram  1500  includes the sequences of states  1502  that an object or interaction goes through during its life in response to stimuli, together with its responses and actions. It uses a graphic notation that shows states of an object, the events that cause a transition from one state to another, and the actions that result from the transition. 
   The functional view can be represented by activity diagrams  1600  and more traditional descriptive narratives such as pseudo code and minispecifications. An activity diagram  1600  is depicted in  FIG. 16 , and is a special case of a state diagram where most, if not all, of the states are action states  1602  and where most, if not all, of the transitions are triggered by completion of the actions in the source states. Activity diagrams  1600  are used in situations where all or most of the events represent the completion of internally generated actions. 
   There is also a fourth view mingled with the static view called the architectural view. This view is modeled using package, component and deployment diagrams. Package diagrams show packages of classes and the dependencies among them. Component diagrams  1700 , depicted in  FIG. 17 , are graphical representations of a system or its component parts. Component diagrams  1700  show the dependencies among software components, including source code components, binary code components and executable components. As depicted in  FIG. 18 , Deployment diagrams  1800  are used to show the distribution strategy for a distributed object system. Deployment diagrams  1800  show the configuration of run-time processing elements and the software components, processes and objects that live on them. 
   Although discussed in terms of class diagrams, one skilled in the art will recognize that the software development tool of the present invention may support these and other graphical views. 
   QUALITY ASSURANCE MODULE 
   There are a variety of modules  704  in the software development tool  610  of the present invention. Some of the modules  704  access information to generate graphical and code documentation in custom formats, export to different file formats, or develop patterns. The software development tool also includes a quality assurance (QA) module which monitors the modifications to the source code and calculates various complexity metrics, i.e., various measurements of the program&#39;s performance or efficiency, to support quality assurance. The types of metrics calculated by the software development tool include basic metrics, cohesion metrics, complexity metrics, coupling metrics, Halstead metrics, inheritance metrics, maximum metrics, polymorphism metrics, and ratio metrics. Examples of these metrics with their respective definitions are identified in Tables 1-9 below. 
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 1 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Basic Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Basic Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Lines Of Code 
               Counts the number of code lines. The user determines 
             
             
                 
               whether to include comments and blank lines. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Counts the number of attributes. The user determines 
             
             
               Attributes 
               whether to include inherited attributes. Inherited 
             
             
                 
               attributes may be counted. If a class has a high number of 
             
             
                 
               attributes, it may be appropriate to divide it into 
             
             
                 
               subclasses. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Counts the number of classes. 
             
             
               Classes 
             
             
               Number of 
               Counts the number of constructors. The user determines 
             
             
               Constructors 
               whether to include all constructors, or to limit the 
             
             
                 
               count to public constructors, protected constructors, etc. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Counts the number of imported packages/classes. 
             
             
               Import 
               This measure can highlight excessive importing, 
             
             
               Statements 
               and also can be used as a measure of coupling. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Counts the number of members, i.e., attributes 
             
             
               Members 
               and operations. The user determines whether to 
             
             
                 
               include inherited members. If a class has a high number 
             
             
                 
               of members, it may be appropriate to divide it into 
             
             
                 
               subclasses. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Counts the number of operations. The user determines 
             
             
               Operations 
               whether to include inherited operations. If a class 
             
             
                 
               has a high number of operations, it may be appropriate 
             
             
                 
               to divide it into subclasses. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 2 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Cohesion Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Cohesion 
                 
             
             
               Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Lack Of 
               Takes each pair of methods in a class and determines 
             
             
               Cohesion Of 
               a set of fields accessed by each of them. If the pair 
             
             
               Methods 1 
               has disjoint sets of field accesses, the value for P is 
             
             
                 
               incremented by one. If the pair shares at least one field 
             
             
                 
               access, then the value for Q is incremented by one. 
             
             
                 
               After considering each pair of methods: 
             
             
                 
               RESULT = (P &gt; Q) ? (P − Q): 0 
             
             
                 
               A low value indicates high coupling between methods, 
             
             
                 
               which indicates potentially low reusability and 
             
             
                 
               increased testing because many methods can affect 
             
             
                 
               the same attributes. 
             
             
               Lack Of 
               Counts the percentage of methods that do not access 
             
             
               Cohesion Of 
               a specific attribute averaged over all attributes in 
             
             
               Methods 2 
               the class. A high value of cohesion (a low lack of cohesion) 
             
             
                 
               implies that the class is well designed. A cohesive class will 
             
             
                 
               tend to provide a high degree of encapsulation, whereas 
             
             
                 
               a lack of cohesion decreases encapsulation and increases 
             
             
                 
               complexity. 
             
             
               Lack Of 
               Measures the dissimilarity of methods in a class by 
             
             
               Cohesion Of 
               attributes. 
             
             
               Methods 3 
               If m = number of methods in a class 
             
             
                 
                a = number of attributes in a class 
             
             
                 
                mA = number of methods that access an attribute 
             
             
                 
                EmA = sum of mA for each attribute 
             
             
                 
               Then RESULT = 100 * (EmA/a − m) / (1 − m) 
             
             
                 
               A low value indicates good class subdivision, which implies 
             
             
                 
               simplicity and high reusability. A high lack of cohesion 
             
             
                 
               increases complexity, thereby increasing the likelihood 
             
             
                 
               of errors during the development process. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 3 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Complexity Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Complexity 
                 
             
             
               Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Attribute 
               Defined as the sum of each attribute&#39;s value in the class. 
             
             
               Complexity 
               The value is evaluated as: 
             
          
         
         
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
          
             
                 
               boolean 
               1 
               Void 
               3 
               Long 
               3 
             
             
                 
               byte 
               1 
               Boolean 
               3 
               Number 
               3 
             
             
                 
               char 
               1 
               Byte 
               3 
               Float 
               3 
             
             
                 
               short 
               1 
               Character 
               3 
               Double 
               3 
             
             
                 
               int 
               1 
               String 
               3 
               array 
               3 
             
             
                 
               long 
               1 
               StringBuffer 
               3 
               java.lang.* 
               5 
             
             
                 
               float 
               2 
               Short 
               3 
               Vector 
               7 
             
             
                 
               double 
               2 
               Integer 
               3 
               others 
               9 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Cyclomatic 
               Represents the cognitive complexity of the class. It counts 
             
             
               Complexity 
               the number of possible paths through an algorithm by 
             
             
                 
               counting the number of distinct regions on a flowgraph, 
             
             
                 
               i.e., the number of ‘if,’ ‘for’ and ‘while’ statements in 
             
             
                 
               the operation&#39;s body. The user determines whether to 
             
             
                 
               include case labels of switch statement. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Processes all of the methods and constructors, and counts 
             
             
               Remote 
               the number of different remote methods called. A remote 
             
             
               Methods 
               method is defined as a method which is not declared in 
             
             
                 
               either the class itself or its ancestors. 
             
             
               Response 
               Calculated as ‘Number of Local Methods’ + ‘Number 
             
             
               For Class 
               of Remote Methods.’ The size of the response set for the 
             
             
                 
               class includes methods in the class’ inheritance 
             
             
                 
               hierarchy and methods that can be invoked on other 
             
             
                 
               objects. A class which provides a larger response set 
             
             
                 
               is considered to be more complex and requires more 
             
             
                 
               testing than one with a smaller overall design 
             
             
                 
               complexity. 
             
             
               Weighted 
               The sum of the complexity of all methods for a class, 
             
             
               Methods Per 
               where each method is weighted by its cyclomatic 
             
             
               Class 1 
               complexity. The number of methods and the 
             
             
                 
               complexity of the methods involved is a predictor of 
             
             
                 
               how much time and effort is required to develop 
             
             
                 
               and maintain the class. Methods specified in 
             
             
                 
               a class are included, i.e., methods inherited from 
             
             
                 
               a parent are excluded. 
             
             
               Weighted 
               Measures the complexity of a class, assuming that a class 
             
             
               Methods Per 
               with more methods than another is more complex, and that 
             
             
               Class 2 
               a method with more parameters than another is also likely 
             
             
                 
               to be more complex. Methods specified in a class are 
             
             
                 
               included, i.e., methods inherited from a parent are 
             
             
                 
               excluded. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 4 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Coupling Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Coupling 
                 
             
             
               Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Coupling 
               Represents the number of other classes to which a class is 
             
             
               Between 
               coupled. Counts the number of reference types that are used 
             
             
               Objects 
               in attribute declarations, formal parameters, return types, 
             
             
                 
               throws declarations and local variables, and types from 
             
             
                 
               which attribute and method selections are made. 
             
             
                 
               Primitive types, types from java.lang package, and 
             
             
                 
               supertypes are not counted. Excessive coupling between 
             
             
                 
               objects is detrimental to modular design and prevents 
             
             
                 
               reuse. The more independent a class is, the easier it 
             
             
                 
               is to reuse it in another application. In order to 
             
             
                 
               improve modularity and promote encapsulation, inter- 
             
             
                 
               object class couples should be kept to a minimum. The 
             
             
                 
               larger the number of couples, the higher the sensitivity 
             
             
                 
               to changes in other parts of the design, and therefore 
             
             
                 
               maintenance is more difficult. A measure of coupling is 
             
             
                 
               useful to determine how complex the testing of various 
             
             
                 
               parts of a design is likely to be. The higher the inter- 
             
             
                 
               object class coupling, the more rigorous the testing 
             
             
                 
               needs to be. 
             
             
               Coupling 
               The fraction having the number of non-inheritance 
             
             
               Factor 
               couplings as a numerator and the maximum possible 
             
             
                 
               number of couplings in a system as a denominator. 
             
             
                 
               This measure is from the Metrics for Object- 
             
             
                 
               Oriented Development suite. 
             
             
               Data 
               Counts the number of reference types used in the attribute 
             
             
               Abstraction 
               declarations. Primitive types, types from java.lang 
             
             
               Coupling 
               package and super types are not counted. 
             
             
               FanOut 
               Counts the number of reference types that are used in 
             
             
                 
               attribute declarations, formal parameters, return types, 
             
             
                 
               throws declarations, and local variables. Simple types and 
             
             
                 
               super types are not counted. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 5 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Halstead Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Halstead 
                 
             
             
               Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Halstead 
               This measure is one of the Halstead Software Science 
             
             
               Difficulty 
               metrics. It is calculated as (‘Number of Unique 
             
             
                 
               Operators’ / ‘Number of Unique Operands’) * 
             
             
                 
               (‘Number of Operands’ / ‘Number of Unique 
             
             
                 
               Operands’). 
             
             
               Halstead 
               This measure is one of the Halstead Software Science 
             
             
               Effort 
               metrics. It is calculated as ‘Halstead Difficulty’ * 
             
             
                 
               ‘Halstead Program Volume.’ 
             
             
               Halstead Program 
               This measure is one of the Halstead Software Science 
             
             
               Length 
               metrics. It is calculated as ‘Number of 
             
             
                 
               Operators’ + ‘Number of Operands.&#39; 
             
             
               Halstead Program 
               This measure is one of the Halstead Software Science 
             
             
               Vocabulary 
               metrics. It is calculated as ‘Number of Unique 
             
             
                 
               Operators’ + ‘Number of Unique Operands.’ 
             
             
               Halstead Program 
               This measure is one of the Halstead Software Science 
             
             
               Volume 
               metrics. It is calculated as ‘Halstead Program 
             
             
                 
               Length’ * Log2(‘Halstead Program Vocabulary’). 
             
             
               Number Of 
               This measure is used as an input to the Halstead 
             
             
               Operands 
               Software Science metrics. It counts the number of 
             
             
                 
               operands used in a class 
             
             
               Number Of 
               This measure is used as an input to the Halstead 
             
             
               Operators 
               Software Science metrics. It counts the number of 
             
             
                 
               operators used in a class 
             
             
               Number Of 
               This measure is used as an input to the Halstead 
             
             
               Unique 
               Software Science metrics. It counts the number of 
             
             
               Operands 
               unique operands used in a class. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               This measure is used as an input to the Halstead 
             
             
               Unique 
               Software Science metrics. It counts the number of 
             
             
               Operators 
               unique operators used in a class. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 6 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Incapsulation Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Incapsulation 
                 
             
             
               Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Attribute Hiding 
               The fraction having the sum of the invisibilities of all 
             
             
               Factor 
               attributes defined in all classes as a numerator, and the 
             
             
                 
               total number of attributes defined in the project as a 
             
             
                 
               denominator. The invisibility of an attribute is the 
             
             
                 
               percentage of the total classes from which this attribute 
             
             
                 
               is not visible. This measure is from the Metrics for 
             
             
                 
               Object-Oriented Development suite. 
             
             
               Method Hiding 
               The fraction having the sum of the invisibilities of all 
             
             
               Factor 
               methods defined in all classes as a numerator, and the 
             
             
                 
               total number of methods defined in the project as a 
             
             
                 
               denominator. The invisibility of a method is the 
             
             
                 
               percentage of the total classes from which this 
             
             
                 
               method is not visible. This measure is from the 
             
             
                 
               Metrics for Object-Oriented Development suite. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 7 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Inheritance Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Inheritance 
                 
             
             
               Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Attribute 
               The fraction having the sum of inherited attributes in all 
             
             
               Inheritance 
               classes in the project as a numerator, and the total 
             
             
               Factor 
               number of available attributes (locally defined plus 
             
             
                 
               inherited) for all classes as a denominator. This measure is 
             
             
                 
               from the Metrics for Object-Oriented Development suite. 
             
             
               Depth Of 
               Counts how far down the inheritance hierarchy a class or 
             
             
               Inheritance 
               interface is declared. High values imply that a class is quite 
             
             
               Hierarchy 
               specialized. 
             
             
               Method 
               The fraction having the sum of inherited methods in all 
             
             
               Inheritance 
               classes in the project as a numerator, and the total 
             
             
               Factor 
               number of available methods (locally defined plus 
             
             
                 
               inherited) for all classes as a denominator. This 
             
             
                 
               measure is from the Metrics for Object-Oriented 
             
             
                 
               Development suite. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Counts the number of classes which inherit from a 
             
             
               Child 
               particular class, i.e., the number of classes in the 
             
             
               Classes 
               inheritance tree down from a class. A non-zero value 
             
             
                 
               indicates that the particular class is being re-used. 
             
             
                 
               The abstraction of the class may be poor if there 
             
             
                 
               are too many child classes. A high value of this measure 
             
             
                 
               points to the definite amount of testing required for each 
             
             
                 
               child class. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 8 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Maximum Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Maximum 
                 
             
             
               Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Maximum 
               Counts the maximum depth of ‘if,’ ‘for’ and ‘while’ 
             
             
               Number Of 
               branches in the bodies of methods. Logical units with a 
             
             
               Levels 
               large number of nested levels may need implementation 
             
             
                 
               simplification and process improvement because groups 
             
             
                 
               that contain more than seven pieces of information are 
             
             
                 
               increasingly harder for people to understand in problem 
             
             
                 
               solving. 
             
             
               Maximum 
               Displays the maximum number of parameters among all 
             
             
               Number Of 
               class operations. Methods with many parameters tend 
             
             
               Parameters 
               to be more specialized and, thus, are less likely to 
             
             
                 
               be reusable. 
             
             
               Maximum 
               Counts the maximum size of the operations for a class. 
             
             
               Size Of 
               Method size is determined in terms of cyclomatic 
             
             
               Operation 
               complexity, i.e., the number of ‘if,’ ‘for’ and 
             
             
                 
               ‘while’ statements in the body of the operation. The user 
             
             
                 
               determines whether to include case labels of switch 
             
             
                 
               statement. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 9 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Polymorphism Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Polymorphism 
                 
             
             
               Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Counts the number of operations added by a class. 
             
             
               Added 
               Inherited and overridden operations are not counted. 
             
             
               Methods 
               Classes without parents are not processed. A large 
             
             
                 
               value of this measure indicates that the functionality 
             
             
                 
               of the given class becomes increasingly distinct from 
             
             
                 
               that of the parent classes. In this case, it should be 
             
             
                 
               considered whether this class genuinely should be 
             
             
                 
               inheriting from the parent, or if it could be broken 
             
             
                 
               down into several smaller classes. 
             
             
               Number Of 
               Counts the number of inherited operations which a class 
             
             
               Overridden 
               overrides. Classes without parents are not processed. 
             
             
               Methods 
               High values tend to indicate design problems, i.e., 
             
             
                 
               subclasses should generally add to and extend the 
             
             
                 
               functionality of the parent classes rather than 
             
             
                 
               overriding them. 
             
             
               Polymorphism 
               This measure is from the Metrics for Object-Oriented 
             
             
               Factor 
               Development suite, and is calculated as a fraction. 
             
             
                 
               The numerator is the sum of the overriding methods in all 
             
             
                 
               classes. This is the actual number of possible different 
             
             
                 
               polymorphic situations. A given message sent to a class 
             
             
                 
               can be bound, statically or dynamically, to a named 
             
             
                 
               method implementation. The latter can have as many 
             
             
                 
               shapes (morphos) as the number of times this same 
             
             
                 
               method is overridden in that class’ descendants. 
             
             
                 
               The denominator represents the maximum number of 
             
             
                 
               possible distinct polymorphic situations for that 
             
             
                 
               class as the sum for each class of the number of new 
             
             
                 
               methods multiplied by the number of descendants. This 
             
             
                 
               maximum would be the case where all new methods 
             
             
                 
               defined in each class would be overridden in all of 
             
             
                 
               their derived classes.. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 10 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Ratio Metrics 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Ratio Metrics 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Comment Ratio 
               Counts the ratio of comments to total lines of code 
             
             
                 
               including comments. The user determines whether to 
             
             
                 
               include blank lines as part of the total lines of code. 
             
             
               Percentage Of 
               Counts the percentage of package members in a class. 
             
             
               Package 
             
             
               Members 
             
             
               Percentage Of 
               Counts the percentage of private members in a class. 
             
             
               Private 
             
             
               Members 
             
             
               Percentage Of 
               Counts the percentage of protected members in a class. 
             
             
               Protected 
             
             
               Members 
             
             
               Percentage Of 
               Counts the proportion of vulnerable members in a class. 
             
             
               Public 
               A large proportion of such members means that the class 
             
             
               Members 
               has high potential to be affected by external classes 
             
             
                 
               and means that increased efforts will be needed to 
             
             
                 
               test such a class thoroughly. 
             
             
               True Comment 
               Counts the ratio of comments to total lines of code 
             
             
               Ratio 
               excluding comments. The user determines whether to 
             
             
                 
               include blank lines as part of the total lines of code. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   The QA module also provides audits, i.e., the module checks for conformance to predefined or user-defined styles. The types of audits provided by the module include coding style, critical errors, declaration style, documentation, naming style, performance, possible errors and superfluous content. Examples of these audits with their respective definitions are identified in Tables 10-17 below. 
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 11 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Coding Style Audits 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Coding Style Audits 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Avoid Complex 
               When using the comma operator in the 
             
             
               Initialization or 
               initialization or update clause of a 
             
             
               Update Clause in 
               for statement, avoid the complexity of  
             
             
               For Loops 
               using more than three variables. 
             
             
               Avoid Implementation 
               This rule helps you avoid referencing 
             
             
               Packages Referencing 
               packages that normally should not be 
             
             
                 
               referenced. 
             
             
               Access Of Static 
               Static members should be referenced through 
             
             
               Members Through 
               class names rather than through objects. 
             
             
               Objects 
             
             
               Assignment To Formal 
               Formal parameters should not be assigned. 
             
             
               Parameters 
             
             
               Avoid Too Long Files 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
                 
               files longer than  2000 lines are 
             
             
                 
               cumbersome and should be avoided. 
             
             
               Avoid Too Long Lines 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
                 
               lines longer than 80 characters should be 
             
             
                 
               avoided, since they&#39;re not handled well 
             
             
                 
               by many terminals and tools. 
             
             
               Complex Assignment 
               Checks for the occurrence of multiple 
             
             
                 
               assignments and assignments to variables 
             
             
                 
               within the same expression. Complex 
             
             
                 
               assignments should be avoided since they 
             
             
                 
               decrease program readability. 
             
             
               Don&#39;t Code Numerical 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
               Constants Directly 
               numerical constants (literals) should not 
             
             
                 
               be coded directly, except for -1, 0, 
             
             
                 
               and 1, which can appear in a for loop as 
             
             
                 
               counter values. 
             
             
               Don&#39;t Place Multiple 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
               Statements on the 
               each line should contain at most one 
             
             
               Same Line 
               statement. 
             
             
               Don&#39;t Use the 
               The negation operator slows down the 
             
             
               Negation Operator 
               readability of the program. Thus, it 
             
             
               Frequently 
               is recommended that it not be used frequently. 
             
             
               Operator ‘?:’ May Not 
               The operator ‘?:’ makes the code 
             
             
               Be Used 
               harder to read than the alternative form with 
             
             
                 
               an if-statement. 
             
             
               Parenthesize 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
               Conditional Part of 
               if an expression containing a binary operator 
             
             
               Ternary Conditional 
               appears before the ? in the ternary ? : 
             
             
               Expression 
               operator, it should be parenthesized. 
             
             
               Put Declarations Only 
               Sun Code Conventions for Java recommends 
             
             
               at the Beginning of 
               to put declarations only at the beginning 
             
             
               Blocks 
               of blocks. (A block is any code surrounded 
             
             
                 
               by curly braces “{” and “}”.) Don&#39;t wait to 
             
             
                 
               declare variables until their first use; 
             
             
                 
               it can confuse the unwary programmer and 
             
             
                 
               hamper code portability within the scope. 
             
             
               Provide Incremental In 
               Checks if the third argument of the 
             
             
               For-Statement or use 
               ‘for’-statement is missing. 
             
             
               while-statement 
             
             
               Replacement For 
               Demand import-declarations must be replaced 
             
             
               Demand Imports 
               by a list of single import-declarations 
             
             
                 
               that are actually imported into the 
             
             
                 
               compilation unit. In other words, 
             
             
                 
               import-statements may not end 
             
             
                 
               with an asterisk. 
             
             
               Switch Statement 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
               Should Include a 
               every switch statement should include a 
             
             
               Default Case 
               default case. 
             
             
               Use Abbreviated 
               Use the abbreviated assignment operator in 
             
             
               Assignment Operator 
               order to write programs more rapidly. Also 
             
             
                 
               some compilers run faster with the 
             
             
                 
               abbreviated assignment operator. 
             
             
               Use ‘this’ Explicitly 
               Tries to make the developer use ‘this’ 
             
             
               To Access Class 
               explicitly when trying to access class 
             
             
               Members 
               members. Using the same class member names 
             
             
                 
               with parameter names often makes what the 
             
             
                 
               developer is referring to unclear. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 12 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Critical Errors Audits 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Critical Errors 
                 
             
             
               Audits 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Avoid Hiding 
               Detects when attributes declared in child classes 
             
             
               Inherited Attributes 
               hide inherited attributes. 
             
             
               Avoid Hiding 
               Detects when inherited static operations are 
             
             
               Inherited Static 
               hidden by child classes. 
             
             
               Methods 
             
             
               Command Query 
               Prevents methods that return a value from a 
             
             
               Separation 
               modifying state. The methods used to query 
             
             
                 
               the state of an object must be different 
             
             
                 
               from the methods used to perform commands 
             
             
                 
               (change the state of the object). 
             
             
               Hiding Of Names 
               Declarations of names should not hide other 
             
             
                 
               declarations of the same name. 
             
             
               Inaccessible 
               Overload resolution only considers 
             
             
               Constructor Or 
               constructors and methods that are visible at 
             
             
               Method Matches 
               the point of the call. If, however, all the 
             
             
                 
               constructors and methods were considered, there 
             
             
                 
               may be more matches. This rule is violated in 
             
             
                 
               this case. Imagine that ClassB is in a different 
             
             
                 
               package than ClassA. Then the allocation of 
             
             
                 
               ClassB violates this rule since the second 
             
             
                 
               constructor is not visible at the point of the 
             
             
                 
               allocation, but it still matches the allocation 
             
             
                 
               (based on signature). Also the call to open in 
             
             
                 
               ClassB violates this rule since the second and 
             
             
                 
               the third declarations of open are not visible 
             
             
                 
               at the point of the call, but it still matches 
             
             
                 
               the call (based on signature). 
             
             
               Multiple Visible 
               Multiple declarations with the same name must 
             
             
               Declarations With 
               not be simultaneously visible except for 
             
             
               Same Name 
               overloaded methods. 
             
             
               Overriding a Non- 
               Checks for abstract methods overriding 
             
             
               Abstract Method With 
               non-abstract methods in a subclass. 
             
             
               an Abstract Method 
             
             
               Overriding a Private 
               A subclass should not contain a method with 
             
             
               Method 
               the same name and signature as in a superclass 
             
             
                 
               if these methods are declared to be private. 
             
             
               Overloading Within a 
               A superclass method may not be overloaded 
             
             
               Subclass 
               within a subclass unless all overloading in the 
             
             
                 
               superclass are also overridden in the subclass. 
             
             
                 
               It is very unusual for a subclass to be 
             
             
                 
               overloading methods in its superclass without 
             
             
                 
               also overriding the methods it is overloading. 
             
             
                 
               More frequently this happens due to inconsistent 
             
             
                 
               changes between the superclass and subclass - 
             
             
                 
               i.e., the intention of the user is to override 
             
             
                 
               the method in the superclass, but due to the error, 
             
             
                 
               the subclass method ends up overloading the 
             
             
                 
               superclass method. 
             
             
               Use of Static Attribute 
               Non-final static attributes should not be used 
             
             
               for Initialization 
               in initializations of attributes. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 13 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Declaration Style Audits 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Declaration Style 
                 
             
             
               Audits 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Badly Located Array 
               Array declarators must be placed next to the type 
             
             
               Declarators 
               descriptor of their component type. 
             
             
               Constant Private 
               Private attributes that never get their values 
             
             
               Attributes Must Be 
               changed must be declared final. By explicitly 
             
             
               Final 
               declaring them in such a way, a reader of the 
             
             
                 
               source code get some information of how the 
             
             
                 
               attribute is supposed to be used. 
             
             
               Constant Variables 
               Local variables that never get their values 
             
             
               Must Be Final 
               changed must be declared final. By explicitly 
             
             
                 
               declaring them in such a way, a reader of the 
             
             
                 
               source code obtains information about how the 
             
             
                 
               variable is supposed to be used. 
             
             
               Declare Variables In 
               Several variables (attributes and local variables) 
             
             
               One Statement Each 
               should not be declared in the same statement. 
             
             
               Instantiated Classes 
               This rule recommends making all instantiated 
             
             
               Should Be Final 
               classes final. It checks classes which are 
             
             
                 
               present in the object model. Classes from 
             
             
                 
               search/classpath are ignored. 
             
             
               List All Public 
               Enforces a standard to improve readability. 
             
             
               And Package 
               Methods/data in your class should be ordered 
             
             
               Members First 
               properly. 
             
             
               Order of Class 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
               Members Declaration 
               the parts of a class or interface declaration 
             
             
                 
               should appear in the following order 
             
          
         
         
             
             
             
          
             
                 
               1. 
               Class (static) variables. First the 
             
             
                 
                 
               public class variables, then the 
             
             
                 
                 
               protected, then package level (no 
             
             
                 
                 
               access modifier), and 
             
             
                 
                 
               then the private. 
             
             
                 
               2. 
               Instance variables. First the public class 
             
             
                 
                 
               variables, then the protected, then 
             
             
                 
                 
               package level (no access modifier), 
             
             
                 
                 
               and then the private. 
             
             
                 
               3. 
               Constructors 
             
             
                 
               4. 
               Methods 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Order Of 
               Checks for correct ordering of modifiers. For 
             
             
               Appearance 
               classes, this includes visibility (public, 
             
             
               Of Modifiers 
               protected or private), abstract, static, 
             
             
                 
               final. For attributes, this includes visibility 
             
             
                 
               (public, protected or private), static, final, 
             
             
                 
               transient, volatile. For operations, this 
             
             
                 
               includes visibility (public, protected or private), 
             
             
                 
               abstract, static, final, synchronized, native. 
             
             
               Put the Main 
               Tries to make the program comply with various 
             
             
               Function Last 
               coding standards regarding the form of the class 
             
             
                 
               definitions. 
             
             
               Place Public 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
               Class First 
               the public class or interface should be the 
             
             
                 
               first class or interface in the file. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 14 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Documentation Audits 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Documentation 
                 
             
             
               Audits 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Bad Tag In JavaDoc 
               This rule verifies code against accidental 
             
             
               Comments 
               use of improper JavaDoc tags. 
             
             
               Distinguish Between 
               Checks whether the JavaDoc comments in your 
             
             
               JavaDoc And Ordinary 
               program ends with ‘**/’  and ordinary C-style 
             
             
               Comments 
               ones with ‘*/.’ 
             
             
               Provide File 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, all 
             
             
               Comments 
               source files should begin with a c-style comment 
             
             
                 
               that lists the class name, version information, 
             
             
                 
               date, and copyright notice. 
             
             
               Provide JavaDoc 
               Checks whether JavaDoc comments are provided 
             
             
               Comments 
               for classes, interfaces, methods and attributes. 
             
             
                 
               Options allow to specify whether to check 
             
             
                 
               JavaDoc comments for public, package, 
             
             
                 
               protected or all classes and members. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 15 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Naming Style Audits 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Naming Style Audits 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Class Name Must 
               Checks whether top level classes or interfaces 
             
             
               Match Its File Name 
               have the same name as the file in which they 
             
             
                 
               reside. 
             
             
               Group Operations 
               Enforces standard to improve readability. 
             
             
               With Same Name 
             
             
               Together 
             
             
               Naming Conventions 
               Takes a regular expression and item name and 
             
             
                 
               reports all occurrences where the pattern does 
             
             
                 
               not match the declaration. 
             
             
               Names Of Exception 
               Names of classes which inherit from Exception 
             
             
               Classes 
               should end with Exception. 
             
             
               Use Conventional 
               One-character local variable or parameter names 
             
             
               Variable Names 
               should be avoided, except for temporary and 
             
             
                 
               looping variables, or where a variable holds an 
             
             
                 
               undistinguished value of a type. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 16 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Performance Audits 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Performance Audits 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Avoid Declaring 
               This rule recommends declaring local variables 
             
             
               Variables Inside Loops 
               outside the loops since declaring variables 
             
             
                 
               inside the loop is less efficient. 
             
             
               Append To String 
               Performance enhancements can be obtained by 
             
             
               Within a Loop 
               replacing String operations with StringBuffer 
             
             
                 
               operations if a String object is appended within 
             
             
                 
               a loop. 
             
             
               Complex Loop 
               Avoid using complex expressions as repeat 
             
             
               Expressions 
               conditions within loops. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 17 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Possible Error Audits 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Possible Error Audits 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Avoid Empty Catch 
               Catch blocks should not be empty. 
             
             
               Blocks 
               Programmers frequently forget to process 
             
             
                 
               negative outcomes of a program and tend to 
             
             
                 
               focus more on the positive outcomes. 
             
             
                 
               When ‘Check parameter usage’ option is 
             
             
                 
               on, this rule also checks, whether code does 
             
             
                 
               something with the exception parameter or 
             
             
                 
               not. If not, violation is raised. 
             
             
                 
               You can also specify the list of exceptions, 
             
             
                 
               which should be ignored. For example, for 
             
             
                 
               PropertyVetoException catch block 
             
             
                 
               usually is empty - as a rule, the program just 
             
             
                 
               does nothing if this exception occurs. 
             
             
               Avoid Public And 
               Declare the attributes either private or protected, 
             
             
               Package Attributes 
               and provide operations to access or change them. 
             
             
               Avoid Statements 
               If a statement with an empty body exists in the 
             
             
               With Empty Body 
               code, the software development tool will display 
             
             
                 
               this error message when an audit is performed 
             
             
               Assignment To For- 
               ‘For’-loop variables should not be assigned. 
             
             
               Loop Variables 
             
             
               Don&#39;t Compare 
               Avoid testing for equality of floating point 
             
             
               Floating Point Types 
               numbers since floating-point numbers that  
             
             
                 
               should be equal are not always equal due to  
             
             
                 
               rounding problems. 
             
             
               Enclosing Body 
               The statement of a loop must always be a block. 
             
             
               Within a Block 
               The ‘then’ and ‘else’ parts of ‘if’-statements 
             
             
                 
               must always be blocks. This makes it easier to 
             
             
                 
               add statements without accidentally introducing 
             
             
                 
               bugs in case the developer forgets to add braces. 
             
             
               Explicitly Initialize 
               Explicitly initialize all variables. The only reason 
             
             
               All Variables 
               not to initialize a variable is where it&#39;s declared 
             
             
                 
               is if the initial value depends on some 
             
             
                 
               computation occurnng first. 
             
             
               Method finalize( ) 
               Calling of super.finalize( ) from finalize( ) 
             
             
               Doesn&#39;t Call 
               is good practice of programming, even if the base 
             
             
               super.finalize( ) 
               class doesn&#39;t define the finalize( ) method. 
             
             
                 
               This makes class implementations less dependent 
             
             
                 
               on each other. 
             
             
               Mixing Logical 
               An expression containing multiple logical 
             
             
               Operators Without 
               operators should be parenthesized properly. 
             
             
               Parentheses 
             
             
               No Assignments In 
               Use of assignment within conditions makes the 
             
             
               Conditional 
               source code hard to understand. 
             
             
               Expressions 
             
             
               Supply Break or 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
               Comment in Case 
               every time a case falls through (doesn&#39;t include 
             
             
               Statement 
               a break statement), a comment should be added 
             
             
                 
               where the break statement would normally be. 
             
             
                 
               The break in the default case is redundant, but it 
             
             
                 
               prevents a fall-through error if later another case 
             
             
                 
               is added. 
             
             
               Use ‘equals’  Instead 
               The ‘==’ operator used on strings checks if 
             
             
               Of ‘==’ 
               two string objects are two identical objects. In  
             
             
                 
               most situations, however, one likes to simply 
             
             
                 
               check if two strings have the same value. In 
             
             
                 
               these cases, the ‘equals’ method should 
             
             
                 
               be used. 
             
             
               Use ‘L’ Instead Of 
               It is better to use uppercase ‘L’ to distinguish 
             
             
               ‘1’ at the end of 
               the letter ‘1’ from the number ‘1.’ Thus, 
             
             
               integer constant 
               if a lowercase “1” is used, the software 
             
             
                 
               development tool will display this error message 
             
             
                 
               when an audit is performed. 
             
             
               Use Of the 
               The ‘synchronized’ modifier on methods can 
             
             
               ‘synchronized’ 
               sometimes cause confusion during maintenance as 
             
             
               Modifier 
               well as during debugging. This rule therefore 
             
             
                 
               recommends against using this modifier, and 
             
             
                 
               instead recommends using ‘synchronized’ 
             
             
                 
               statements as replacements. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   
     
       
         
             
           
             
               TABLE 18 
             
           
          
             
                 
             
             
               Superfluous Content Audits 
             
          
         
         
             
             
          
             
               Superfluous Content 
                 
             
             
               Audits 
               Description 
             
             
                 
             
             
               Duplicate Import 
               There should be at most one import declaration 
             
             
               Declarations 
               that imports a particular class/package 
             
             
               Don&#39;t Import the 
               No classes or interfaces need to be imported from 
             
             
               Package the Source 
               the package to which the source code file belongs. 
             
             
               File Belongs To 
               Everything in that package is available without 
             
             
                 
               explicit import statements. 
             
             
               Explicit Import 
               If the code calls for explicit import of classes 
             
             
               Of the java.lang 
               from the package ‘java.lang,’ the software 
             
             
               Classes 
               development tool will display this error message 
             
             
                 
               when an audit is performed. 
             
             
               Equality Operations 
               Avoid performing equality operations on Boolean 
             
             
               On Boolean 
               operands. ‘True’ and ‘false’ literals should 
             
             
               Arguments 
               not be used in conditional clauses. 
             
             
               Imported Items 
               It is not legal to import a class or an interface 
             
             
               Must Be Used 
               and never use it. This rule checks classes and 
             
             
                 
               interfaces that are explicitly imported with their 
             
             
                 
               names - that is not with import of a complete 
             
             
                 
               package, using an asterisk. If unused class and 
             
             
                 
               interface imports are omitted, the amount of 
             
             
                 
               meaningless source code is reduced - 
             
             
                 
               thus the amount of code to be understood by a 
             
             
                 
               reader is minimized. 
             
             
               Unnecessary Casts 
               Checks for the use of type casts that are not 
             
             
                 
               necessary. 
             
             
               Unnecessary 
               Verifies that the runtime type of the left-hand 
             
             
               ‘instanceof’ 
               side expression is the same as the one specified 
             
             
               Evaluations 
               on the right-hand side. 
             
             
               Unused Local 
               Local variables and formal parameter declarations 
             
             
               Variables And 
               must be used. 
             
             
               Formal 
             
             
               Parameters 
             
             
               Use Of Obsolete 
               The modifier ‘abstract’ is considered obsolete 
             
             
               Interface Modifier 
               and should not be used. 
             
             
               Use Of Unnecessary 
               All interface operations are implicitly public and 
             
             
               Interface Member 
               abstract. All interface attributes are implicitly 
             
             
               Modifiers 
               public, final and static. 
             
             
               Unused Private 
               An unused class member might indicate a logical 
             
             
               Class Member 
               flaw in the program. The class declaration has 
             
             
                 
               to be reconsidered in order to  determine the 
             
             
                 
               need of the unused member(s). 
             
             
               Unnecessary Return 
               According to Sun Code Conventions for Java, 
             
             
               Statement Parentheses 
               a return statement with a value should not 
             
             
                 
               use parentheses unless they make the 
             
             
                 
               return value more obvious in some way. 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   If the QA module determines that the source code does not conform to the audit and/or the metrics requirements, an error message is provided to the developer. The audit and metrics requirements are well known in software development. For example, as depicted in  FIG. 19A , the software development tool checks for a variety of coding styles  1900 . If the software development tool were to check for “Access Of Static Members Through Objects”  1902 , it would verify whether static members are referenced through class names rather than through objects  1904 . Further, as depicted in  FIG. 19B , if the software development tool were to check for “Complex Assignment”  1906 , the software development tool would check for the occurrence of multiple assignments and assignments to variables within the same expression to avoid complex assignments since these decrease program readability  1908 . An example of source code  1910  having a complex assignment is depicted in  FIG. 19B , and the corresponding source code  1912  having a non-complex assignment is depicted in FIG.  19 C. For example, the complex assignment:
 
 i*=j++ 
 
in the source code  1910  in  FIG. 19B  can be represented in a non-complex form as follows:
 
j++
 
 i*=j 
 
Both the complex and the non-complex formulas perform the same operations, i.e., add 1 to j and multiply j with i. If the complex assignment identified in the source code  1910  in  FIG. 19B  is used, the software development tool will generate the “Complex Assignment” error message when an audit is performed. If, on the other hand, the non-complex assignment identified in the source code  1912  in  FIG. 19C  is used, the software development tool will not generate the “Complex Assignment” error message when an audit is performed.
 
   An example for each of the audits identified above in Tables 11-18 is provided below: 
   CODING STYLE 
   Avoid Complex Initialization or Update Clause in for Loops 
   When using the comma operator in the initialization or update clause of a for statement, the developer should avoid the complexity of using more than three variables. The following source code illustrates the use of more than three variables in a “for statement”: 
                                          for (i = 0, j =0, k =10, 1=−1; i &lt;cnt;             i++, j++, k--, 1 += 2 ) {             // do something           }                        
To remedy the complexity of using more than three variables, the source code may be rewritten as follows:
 
                                          1=−1;           for ( i = 0, j=0, k=10; i &lt; cnt;             i++,j++,k−− ) {             // do something             1 += 2;           }                        
Avoid Implementation Packages Referencing
 
   This rule helps a developer avoid referencing packages that normally should not be referenced. For example, if the developer uses Facade or AbstractFactory patterns, he or she can make sure that no one uses direct calls to the underlying constructors of the classes. 
   The developer can divide his or her packages into interface and implementation packages, and ensure that no one ever refers to the implementation packages, while the interface packages are accessible for reference. The developer can set up two lists of packages: the allowed (interface) and banned (implementation) packages. For each class reference in source code, this rule verifies that the package where this class belongs is in the allowed list and not in the banned list.
         Package names in the list may be:       

   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
             
           
          
             
               ‘*’ 
               any package is allowed or banned 
             
             
               package name 
               this package is allowed or banned 
             
             
               package name postfixed by ‘*’ 
               any subpackage of the given 
             
             
                 
               package is allowed or banned 
             
             
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   In case of conflict, the narrower rule prevails. For example, if the following list is specifically allowed:
         *   com.mycompany.openapi.*
 
and the following is banned:
   com.mycompany.*
 
In the above example, all subpackages of com.mycompany package are banned except for those belonging to:
   com.mycompany.openapi subpackage.
 
Access of Static Members Through Objects
       

   Static members should be referenced through class names rather than through objects. For example, the following code is incorrect: 
                                          class AOSMTO1 {             void func () {               AOSMTO1 obj1 = new AOSMTO1();               AOSMTO2 obj2 = new AOSMTO2();               obj1.attr = 10;               obj2.attr = 20;               obj1.oper();               obj2.oper();               this.attr++;               this.oper();             }             static int attr;             static void oper () {}           }           class AOSMTO2 {             static int attr;             static void oper () {}           }                        
The following source code corrects the above code so that the static members are referenced via class names:
 
                                          class AOSMTO1 {             void func () {               AOSMTO1 obj1 = new AOSMTO1();               AOSMTO2 obj2 = new AOSMTO2();               AOSMTO1.attr = 10;               AOSMTO2.attr = 20;               AOSMTO1.oper();               AOSMTO2.oper();               AOSMTO1.attr++;               AOSMTO1.oper();             }             static int attr;             static void oper () {}           }           class AOSMTO2 {             static int attr;             static void oper () {}           }                        
Assignment to Formal Parameters
 
   Formal parameters should not be assigned values. For example, the following code increments param by 11, and returns the new value for param: 
                                          int oper (int param) {             param += 10;             return ++param;           }                        
Rather than reassigning the value for param, the following code declares a new variable result, sets result to equal param+11, and returns the value for result:
 
                                          int oper (int param) {             int result = param + 10;             return ++result;           }                        
Avoid Too Long Files
 
   Files longer than 2000 lines are cumbersome and should be avoided. 
   Avoid Too Long Lines 
   Lines longer than 80 characters should be avoided, since they are not handled well by many terminals and tools. 
   Complex Assignment 
   This audit checks for the occurrence of multiple assignments and assignments to variables within the same expression. Complex assignments should be avoided since they decrease program readability. 
   If the ‘strict’ option is off, assignments of equal value to several variables in one operation are permitted. For example the following statement would raise violation if ‘strict’ option were on; otherwise there would be no violation:
 
i=j=k=0;
 
The following source code is an example of a compound assignment, which should be avoided:
 
 i*=j++; 
 
k=j=10;
 
1 =j +=15;
 
The following source code is an example of a nested assignment, which should be avoided:
 
 i=j +++20;
 
 i =( j =25)+30;
 
The source code shown above is corrected by breaking the statements into several statements. For example, the following source code:
 
 i*=j++; 
 
may be replaced by:
 
j++;
 
 i*=j 
 
The following code:
 
k=j=10;
 
may be replaced by:
 
k=10;
 
j=10;
 
The following code:
 
1 =j +=15;
 
may be replaced by:
 
 j +=15;
 
1=j;
 
The following code:
 
 i=j +++20;
 
may be replaced by:
 
j++;
 
 i=j +20;
 
The following source code:
 
 i =( j =25)+30;
 
may be replaced by:
 
j=25;
 
 i=j +30;
 
Don&#39;t Code Numerical Constants Directly
 
   Numerical constants (literals) should not be coded directly, except for −1, 0, and 1, which can appear in a for loop as counter values. Rather than coding numerical constants directly, add static final attributes for numeric constants. 
   Don&#39;t Place Multiple Statements on the Same Line 
   Each line should contain at most one statement. For example, for the following code:
         if(someCondition) someMethod( );
 
i++; j++;
 
each statement should be placed on a separate line, as follows:
   if(someCondition)
           someMethod( );
 
i++;
 
j++;
 
Don&#39;t Use the Negation Operator Frequently
   
               

   The negation operator slows down the readability of the program, so it is recommended that it should not be used frequently. The following source code illustrates a violation of this rule: 
                                          boolean isOk = verifySomewhat()           if( !isOk )             return 0;           else             return 1;                        
The program logic should be changed to avoid negation:
 
                                          boolean isOk = verifySomewhat()           if( isOk )             return 1;           else             return 0;                        
Operator ‘?:’ may not be Used
 
   The operator ‘?:’ makes the code harder to read, than the alternative form with an if-statement. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          void func (int a) {             int b = (a == 10) ? 20 : 30;           }                        
The ‘?:’ operator should be replaced with the appropriate if-else statement.
 
                                          void func (int a) {             if (a == 10)               b = 20;             else               b = 30;           }                        
Parenthesize Conditional Part of Ternary Conditional Expression
         If an expression containing a binary operator appears before the “?” in the ternary “?:” operator, it should be parenthesized. Thus, the following code:
 
return  x &gt;=0  ?x:−x; 
 
should be replaced by:
 
return ( x &gt;=0) ? x:−x; 
 
Put Declarations Only at the Beginning of Blocks
       
   Declarations should be placed only at the beginning of blocks. A block is any code surrounded by curly braces “{” and “}”. Waiting to declare variables until their first use can confuse the unwary programmer and hamper code portability within the scope. 
   Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          void myMethod() {             if(condition) {             doSomeWork();             int int2 = 0;             useInt2(int2);           }           int int1 = 0;           useInt1(int1);           }                        
the declarations should be moved to the beginning of the block, as follows:
 
                                          void myMethod() {             int int1 = 0;// beginning of method block             if (condition) {               int int2 = 0;// beginning of “if” block               doSomeWork();               useInt2(int2);             }             useInt1(int1);           }                        
Provide Incremental in For-statement or Use While-statement
 
This audit checks if the third argument of the for-statement is missing, as shown below:
 
                                          for ( Enumeration enum = getEnum(); enum.hasMoreElements(); ) {             Object o = enum.nextElement();             doSomeProc(o);           }                        
Either the incremental part of a for-structure must be provided or the for-statement must be cast into a while-statement, as shown below:
 
                                          Enumeration enum = getEnum();           while (enum.hasMoreElements()) {             Object o = enum.nextElement();             doSomeProc(o);           }                        
Replacement for Demand Imports
 
   Demand import-declarations must be replaced with a list of single import-declarations that are actually imported into the compilation unit. In other words, import-statements may not end with an asterisk. For example, the following source code violates this audit: 
                                          import java.awt.*;           import javax.swing.*;           class RFDI {             public static JFrame getFrame (Component com) {               while (com != null) {                 if (com instanceofJFrame)                   return (JFrame)com;                 com = com.getParent();               }               return null;             }           }                        
To remedy the above, the demand imports should be replaced with a list of single import declarations, as shown below:
 
                                          import java.awt.Component;           import javax.swing.JFrame;           class RFDI {             public static JFrame getFrame (Component com) {               while (com != null) {                 if (com instanceofJFrame)                   return (JFrame)com;                 com = com.getParent();               }               return null;             }           }                        
Switch Statement Should Include a Default Case
 
   Every switch statement should include a default case. 
   Use Abbreviated Assignment Operator 
   The abbreviated assignment operator should be used to write programs more rapidly. This also increases the speed of some compilers. Thus, the following source code: 
                                          void oper () {             int i = 0;             i = i + 20;             i = 30* i;           }                        
should be replaced by:
 
                                          void oper () {             int i = 0;             i += 20;             i *= 30;           }                        
Use ‘this’ Explicitly To Access Class Members
 
   ‘This’ should be used explicitly to access class members because using the same class members&#39; and parameters&#39; names makes references confusing. For example, the following source code: 
                                          class UTETACM {             int attr = 10;             void func () {               // do something             }             void oper () {               func();               attr = 20;             }           }                        
should be replaced by:
 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               class UTETACM { 
             
             
                 
                 int attr = 10; 
             
             
                 
                 void func () { 
             
             
                 
                   // do something 
             
             
                 
                 } 
             
             
                 
                 void oper () { 
             
             
                 
                   this.func(); 
             
             
                 
                   this.attr = 20; 
             
             
                 
                 } 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   CRITICAL ERRORS 
   Avoid Hiding Inherited Attributes 
   This audit detects when attributes declared in child classes hide inherited attributes. 
   Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          class Elephant extends Animal {             int attr1;             // something...;           }           class Animal {             int attr1;           }                        
the child class attribute should be renamed, as follows:
 
                                          class Elephant extends Animal {             int elphAttr1;             // something...;           }           class Animal {             int attr1;           }                        
Avoid Hiding Inherited Static Methods
 
This audit detects when inherited static operations are hidden by child classes. Thus, in the following source code:
 
                                          class Elephant extends Animal {             void oper1() {}             static void oper2() {}           }           class Animal {             static void oper1() {}             static void oper2() {}           }                        
either ancestor or descendant class operations should be renamed, as follows:
 
                                          class Elephant extends Animal {             void anOper1 () {}             static void anOper2 () {}           }           class Animal {             static void oper1() {}             static void oper2() {}           }                        
Command Query Separation
 
   This audit prevents methods that return a value from modifying state. The methods used to query the state of an object must be different from the methods used to perform commands (change the state of the object). For example, the following source code violates this audit: 
                                          class CQS {             int attr;             int getAttr () {               attr += 10;               return attr;             }           }                        
Hiding Of Names
 
   Declarations of names should not hide other declarations of the same name. The option ‘Formally’ regulates whether hiding of names should be detected for parameter variable, if the only usage of it is to assign its value to the attribute with the same name. Thus, for the following source code: 
                                          class HON {             int index;             void func () {               int index;               // do something             }             void setIndex (int index) {               this.index = index;             }           }                        
The variable which hides the attribute or another variable should be renamed, as follows:
 
                                          class HON {             int index;             void func () {               int index1;               // do something             }             void setIndex (int anIndex) {               this.index = anIndex;             }           }                        
In the above example, the second violation would be raised only if the “formally” option is switched on.
 
Inaccessible Constructor or Method Matches
 
   Overload resolution only considers constructors and methods that are visible at the point of the call. If, however, all the constructors and methods were considered, there may be more matches, which would violate this audit. 
   For example, in the source code below, if ClassB is in a different package than ClassA, then the allocation of ClassB violates this rule since the second constructor is not visible at the point of the allocation, but it still matches the allocation (based on signature). Also the call to oper in ClassB violates this rule since the second and the third declarations of oper is not visible at the point of the call, but it still matches the call (based on signature). 
                                          public class ClassA {             public ClassA (int param) {}             ClassA (char param) {}             ClassA (short param) {}             public void oper (int param) {}             void oper (char param) {}             void oper (short param) {}           }                        
Either such methods or constructors must be given equal visibility, or their signature must be changed, as follows:
 
                                          public class ClassA {             ClassA (intparam) {}             public ClassA (char param) {}             public ClassA (short param) {}             public void oper (int param) {}             void doOper (char param) {}             void doOper (short param) {}           }                        
Multiple Visible Declarations with Same Name
 
   Multiple declarations with the same name must not be simultaneously visible except for overloaded methods. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          class MVDWSN {             void index () {               return;             }             void func () {               int index;             }           }                        
The members (or variables) with clashing names should be renamed, as follows:
 
                                          class MVDWSN {             void index () {               return;             }             void func () {               int anIndex;             }           }                        
Overriding a Non-abstract Method with an Abstract Method
 
   This audit checks for the overriding of non-abstract methods by abstract methods in a subclass. For example, in the following source code, the non-abstract method “func( )” is overridden by the abstract method “func( )” in a subclass: 
                                          class Animal {             void func () {}           }           abstract class Elephant extends Animal {             abstract void func ();           }                        
To remedy this audit, the method may be renamed, or the method should be made abstract in an ancestor class or non-abstract in a descendant, as follows:
 
                                          class Animal {             void func () {}           }           abstract class Elephant extends Animal {             abstract void extFunc ();           }                        
Overriding a Private Method
 
   A subclass should not contain a method with the same name and signature as in a superclass if these methods are declared to be private. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          class Animal {             private void func () {}           }           class Elephant extends Animal {             private void func () {}           }                        
the descendant class&#39; method should be renamed, as follows:
 
                                          class Animal {             private void func () {}           }           class Elephant extends Animal {             private void extFunc () {}           }                        
Overloading within a Subclass
 
   A superclass method may not be overloaded within a subclass unless all overloadings in the superclass are also overridden in the subclass. It is very unusual for a subclass to be overloading methods in its superclass without also overriding the methods it is overloading. More frequently this happens due to inconsistent changes between the superclass and subclass—i.e., the intention of the user is to override the method in the superclass, but due to the error, the subclass method ends up overloading the superclass method. The following source code violates this audit: 
                                          public class Elephant extends Animal {             public void oper (char c) {}             public void oper (Object o) {}           }           class Animal {             public void oper (int i) {}             public void oper (Object o) {}           }                        
In the above code, the other methods should also be overloaded, as follows:
 
                                          public class Elephant extends Animal {             public void oper (char c) {}             public void oper (int i) {}             public void oper (Object o) {}           }           class Animal {             public void oper (int i) {}           }                        
Use of Static Attribute for Initialization
 
   Non-final static attributes should not be used in initializations of attributes. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          class ClassA {             static int state = 15;             static int attr1 = state;             static int attr2 = ClassA.state;             static int attr3 = ClassB.state;           }           class ClassB {             static int state = 25;           }                        
The static attributes used for initialization should be made final, or another constant should be used for initialization, as follows:
 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               class ClassA { 
             
             
                 
                 static int state = 15; 
             
             
                 
                 static final int INITIAL_STATE = 15; 
             
             
                 
                 static int attr1 = INITIAL_STATE; 
             
             
                 
                 static int attr2 = ClassA.state; 
             
             
                 
                 static int attr3 = ClassB.state; 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
               class ClassB { 
             
             
                 
                 static final int state = 25; 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   DECLARATION STYLE 
   Badly Located Array Declarators 
   Array declarators must be placed next to the type descriptor of their component type. Thus, the following source code: 
                                          class BLAD {             int attr[];             int oper (int param[]) [] {               int var[][];               // do something             }           }                        
should be replaced by:
 
                                          class BLAD {             int[] attr;             int[] oper (int[] param) {               int[][] var;               // do something             }           }                        
Constant Private Attributes must be Final
 
   Private attributes that never get their values changed must be declared final. By explicitly declaring them in such a way, a reader of the source code gets some information regarding how the attribute should be used. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          class CPAMBF {               int attr1 = 10;               int attr2 = 20;             void func () {               attr1 = attr2;               System.out.println(attr1);             }           }                        
all private attributes that never change should be made final, as follows:
 
                                          class CPAMBF {             int attr1 = 10;             final int attr2 = 20;             void func () {               attr1 = attr2;               System.out.println(attr1);             }           }                        
Constant Variables Must be Final
 
   Local variables that never get their values changed must be declared final. By explicitly declaring them in such a way, a reader of the source code gets some information regarding how the variable should be used. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          void func () {             int var1 = 10;             int var2 = 20;             var1 = var2;               System.out.println(attr1);           }                        
all variables which are never changed should be made final, as follows:
 
                                          void func () {             intvar1 = 10;             final int var2 = 20;             var1 = var2;               System.out.println(attr1);           }                        
Declare Variables in One Statement Each
 
   Several variables (attributes and local variables) should not be declared in the same statement. The ‘different types only’ option can weaken this rule. When such option is chosen, violation is raised only when variables are of different types, for example: “int foo, fooarray[ ];” is definitely wrong. To correct the following source code: 
                                          class DVIOSE {             int attr1;             int attr2, attr3;             void open () {               int var1;               int var2, var3;             }           }                        
each variable should be declared in separate statements, as follows:
 
                                          class DVIOSE {             int attr1;             int attr2;             int attr3;             void open () {               int var1;               int var2;               int var3;             }           }                        
Instantiated Classes Should be Final
 
   This rule recommends making all instantiated classes final. It checks classes which are present in the object model. Classes from search/classpath are ignored. In the following source code: 
                                          class ICSBF {             private Class1 attr1 = new Class1();             // something...           }           class Class1 {             // something...           }                        
all instantiated classes should be made final, as follows:
 
                                          class ICSBF {             private Class1 attr1 = new Class1();             // something...           }           final class Class1 {             // something...           }                        
List all Public and Package Members First
 
   Enforces standard to improve readability. Methods and/or data in classes should be ordered properly. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          class LAPAPMF {             private int attr;             public void oper () {}           }                        
Public and package members should be placed before protected and private ones, as follows:
 
                                          class LAPAPMF {             public void oper () {}             private int attr;           }                        
Order of Class Members Declaration
 
   The parts of a class or interface declaration should appear in the following order:
         1. Class (static) variables. First the public class variables, then the protected, then package level (no access modifier), and then the private.   2. Instance variables. First the public class variables, then the protected, then package level (no access modifier), and then the private.   3. Constructors.   4. Methods.
 
Order of Appearance of Modifiers
       

   This audit checks for correct ordering of modifiers. For classes, the ordering is: visibility (public, protected or private), abstract, static, final. For attributes, the ordering is: visibility (public, protected or private), static, final, transient, volatile. For operations, the ordering is: visibility (public, protected or private), abstract, static, final, synchronized, native. Thus, the following source code is incorrect: 
                                          final public class OOAOM {             public static final int attr1;             static public int attr2;           }                        
The order of modifiers above should be changed, as follows:
 
                                          public final class OOAOM {             public static final int attr1;             public static int attr2;           }                        
Put the Main Function Last
 
   This audit requires that in class definitions, the main function should be placed later in the definition. Thus, the following source code: 
                                          public class PMFL {             void func1 () {}             public static void main (String args[]) {}             void func2 () {}           }                        
should be modified to:
 
                                          public class PMFL {             public static void main (String args[]) {}             void func1 () {}             void func2 () {}           }                        
Place Public Class First
 
   The public class or interface should be the first class or interface in the file. Thus, the following source code: 
                                          class Helper {             // some code           }           public class PPCM {             // some code           }                        
should be modified to:
 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               public class PPCM { 
             
             
                 
                 // some code 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
               class Helper { 
             
             
                 
                 // some code 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   DOCUMENTATION 
   Bad Tag in JavaDoc Comments 
   This audit prevents the accidental use of improper JavaDoc tags. The following example illustrates the use of a bad tag: 
                                          package audit;           /** Class BTIJDC             * @BAD_TAG_1             * @version 1.0 08-Jan-2000             * @author TogetherSoft             */           public class BTIJDC {             /**             * Attribute attr             * @BAD_TAG_2             * @supplierCardinality 0..             * @clientCardinality 1             */             private int attr;             /** Operation oper             * @BAD_TAG_3             * @return int             */             public int oper () {}           }                        
The misspelled tags in the above code should be replaced, or any non-standard tags should be added to the list of valid tags.
 
Distinguish Between JavaDoc And Ordinary Comments
 
   This audit checks whether JavaDoc comments end with ‘**/’ and ordinary C-style documents end with ‘*/’. Thus, the following code: 
                                          package audit;           /**           *JavaDoc comment           */           public class DBJAOC {             /*             *C-style comment             **/             private int attr;             /**             *JavaDoc comment             */             public void oper () {}           }                        
should be replaced by:
 
                                          package audit;           /**           *JavaDoc comment           **/           public class DBJAOC {             /*             *C-style comment             */             private int attr;             /**             *JavaDoc comment             **/             public void oper () {}           }                        
Provide File Comments
 
   All source files should begin with a c-style comment that lists the class name, version information, date, and copyright notice, as follows 
                                          /*           *Classname           *Version information           *Date           *Copyright notice           */                        
This audit verifies whether the file begins with a c-style comment.
 
Provide JavaDoc Comments
 
   This audit checks whether JavaDoc comments are provided for classes, interfaces, methods and attributes. 
   NAMING STYLE 
   Class Name must Match its File Name 
   This audit checks whether the top level class and/or interface has the same name as the file in which it resides. Thus, in the following source code:
         // File Audit_CNMMIFN.java   class CNMMIFN { }
 
the class or file should be renamed, as follows:
   // File Audit_CNMMIFN.java   class Audit_CNMMIFN { }
 
Group Operations with same Name Together
       

   This audit requires that group operations with the same name be placed together to improve readability. Thus, the following example: 
                                          package audit;           class GOWSNT {             void operation () {}             void function () {}             void operation (int param) {}           }                        
should be modified, as follows:
 
                                          package audit;           class GOWSNT {             void operation 0 {}             void operation (int param) {}             void function 0 {}           }                        
Naming Conventions
 
   This audit takes a regular expression and item name and reports all occurrences where the pattern does not match the declaration. Thus, in the following example, 
                                          package _audit; class _AuditNC {             void operation1 (int Parameter) {             void Operation2 (int parameter) {               int_variable;             }             int my_attribute;             final static int constant;           }                        
The packages, classes, members etc., should be renamed in a proper way, as follows:
 
                                          package audit; class AuditNC {             void operation1 (int parameter) {             void operation2 (int parameter) {               int variable;               }               int myAttribute;               final static int CONSTANT;           }                        
Names of Exception Classes
 
   Names of classes which inherit from Exception should end with Exception. 
   Thus, the following source code: 
   
       
       
         
           class AuditException extends Exception { } 
           class NOEC extends Exception { } should be modified to renmae the exception classes, as follows: 
           class AuditException extends Exception { } 
           class NOECException extends Exception { }
 
Use Conventional Variable Names
 
         
       
     
  
   One-character local variable or parameter names should be avoided, except for temporary and looping variables, or where a variable holds an undistinguished value of a type. Conventional one-character names are: 
                                          b for a byte           c for a char           d for a double           e for an Exception           f for a float           i, j, k for integers           l for a long           o for an Object           s for a String                        
Local variable or parameter names that consist of only two or three uppercase letters should be avoided to avoid potential conflicts with the initial country codes and domain names that are the first component of unique package names.
 
   The following source code does not give conventional names to all local variables: 
                                          void func (double d) {             int i;               Object o;               Exception e;               char s;               Object f;               String k;               Object UK;             }                        
and should be replaced by:
 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
                 void func (double d) { 
             
             
                 
                   int i; 
             
             
                 
                   Object o; 
             
             
                 
                   Exception e; 
             
             
                 
                   char c; 
             
             
                 
                   Object o; 
             
             
                 
                   String s; 
             
             
                 
                   Object o1; 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   PERFORMANCE 
   Avoid Declaring Variables Inside Loops 
   This rule recommends that local variables be declared outside the loops because declaring variables inside the loop is less efficient. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          int good_var = 0           for (int i = 0; i &lt; 100; i++) {             int var1 = 0;             // ...           }           while (true) {             int var2 = 0;             // ...           }           do {             int var3 = 0;             // ...           } while (true);                        
the variable declarations should be moved out of the loop, as follows:
 
                                          int good_var = 0;           int var1;           for (int i = 0; i &lt; 100; i++) {             var1 = 0;             // ...           }           int var2;           while (true) {             var2 = 0;             // ...           }           int var3;           do {             var3 = 0;             // ...           } while (true);                        
Append to String within a Loop
 
   Performance enhancements can be obtained by replacing String operations with StringBuffer operations if a String object is appended within a loop. Thus, in the following example source code: 
                                          public class ATSWL {             public String func () {               String var = “var”;               for (int i = 0; i &lt; 10; i++) {                 var += (“” + i);               }               return var;             }           }                        
StringBuffer class should be used instead of String, as follows:
 
                                          public class ATSWL {             public String func () {               StringBuffer var = new StringBuffer(“var”);               for (int i = 0; i &lt; 10; i++) {                 var.append(“” + i);               }               return var.toString();             }           }                        
Complex Loop Expressions
 
   Avoid using complex expressions as repeat conditions within loops. The following source code violates this audit by using “vector.size( )” within a condition of a “for” loop: 
                                          void oper () {             for (int i = 0; i &lt;vector.size(); i++) {               // do something             }             int size = vector.size();             for (int i = 0; i &lt;size; i++) {               // do something             }           }                        
In the above code, the expression “vector.size( )” should be assigned to a variable before the loop, and that variable should be used in the loop, as follows:
 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               void oper () { 
             
             
                 
                 int size = vector.size(); 
             
             
                 
                 for (int i = 0; i &lt; size; i++) { 
             
             
                 
                   // do something 
             
             
                 
                 } 
             
             
                 
                 int size = vector.size(); 
             
             
                 
                 for (int i = 0; i &lt; size; i++) { 
             
             
                 
                   // do something 
             
             
                 
                 } 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   POSSIBLE ERRORS 
   Avoid Empty Catch Blocks 
   Catch blocks should not be empty. Programmers frequently forget to process negative outcomes of a program and tend to focus more on the positive outcomes. 
   When the ‘Check parameter usage’ option is chosen, this rule also checks whether the code does something with the exception parameter or not. If not, a violation is raised. 
   Avoid Public and Package Attributes 
   Public and package attributes should be avoided. Rather, the attributes should be declared either private or protected, and operations should be provided to access or change the attribute declarations. 
                                          class APAPA {             int attr1;             public int attr2;           }                        
The visibility of attributes should be changed to either private or protected, and access operations for these attributes should be provided, as follows:
 
                                          class APAPA {             private int attr1;             protected int attr2;             public int getAttn1() {               return attr1;             }             public int getAttr2() {               return attr2;             }             public void setAttr2(int newVal) {               attr2 = newVal;             }           }                        
Avoid Statements with Empty Body
 
   Statements having empty bodies should be avoided. For example, in the following source code: 
                              StringTokenizer st = new StringTokenizer(class1.getName(), “.”, true);       String s;       for( s = “”; st.countTokens() &gt; 2;         s = s + st.nextToken());                    
a statement body should be provided. In the alternative, the logic of the program may be changed. For example, the “for” statement can be replaced by a “while” statement, as follows:
 
                              StringTokenizer st = new StringTokenizer(class1.getName(), “.”, true);       String s = “”;       while( st.countTokens() &gt; 2) {         s += st.nextToken();       }                    
Assignment to For-Loop Variables
 
   For-loop variables should not be assigned a value. For example, the for-loop variable “i” should not be assigned the value i++ as follows: 
                                          for (int i = 0; i &lt; charBuf.length; i++) {             while ( Character.isWhitespace(charBuf[i]))               i++;             ....           }                        
A continue operator should be used to correct the above code, as follows:
 
                                          for (int i = 0; i &lt; charBuf.length; i++) {             while ( Character.isWhitespace(charBuf[i]))               continue;             ....           }                        
In the alternative, the for-loop may be converted to a while-loop.
 
Don&#39;t Compare Floating Point Types
 
   Avoid testing floating point numbers for equality. Floating-point numbers that should be equal are not exactly equal due to rounding problems. Thus, the direct comparison in the following code: 
                                          void oper (double d) {             if( d!= 15.0 ) {               for ( double f = 0.0; f &lt; d; f += 1.0) {                 // do something               }             }           }                        
should be replaced with an estimation of the absolute value of the difference, as follows:
 
                                          void oper (double d) {             if( Math.abs(d − 15.0) &lt; Double.MIN_VALUE * 2 ) {               for (double f = 0.0; d − f &gt; DIFF; f += 1.0) {                 // do something               }             }           }                        
Enclosing Body within a Block
 
   The statement of a loop must always be a block. The then and else parts of if—statements must always be blocks. This makes it easier to add statements without accidentally introducing bugs due to missing braces. Thus, the following code is missing braces for both the if-loop and the while-loop: 
                                          if( st == null)             return;           while( st.countTokens() &gt; 2)             s += st.nextToken();                        
The correct form for the above code is as follows:
 
                                          if(st == null) {             return;           }           while( st.countTokens() &gt; 2) {             s += st.nextToken();           }                        
Explicitly Initialize all Variables
 
   All variables should explicitly be initialized. The only reason not to initialize a declared variable is if the initial value depends on a previous computation. For example, the following source code violates this rule since var  0  and var  2  are not initialized: 
                                          void func () {             int var0;             int var1 = 1, var2;             // do something.. }                        
The correct form for the above source code is as follows:
 
                                          void func () {             int var0 = 0;             int var1 = 1, var2 = 0;             // do something..           }                        
Method finalize( ) Doesn&#39;t Call super.finalize( )
 
   It is a good practice of programming to call super.finalize( ) from finalize( ), even if the base class doesn&#39;t define the finalize( ) method. This makes class implementations less dependent on each other. Thus, the following source code: 
                                          void finalize () {           }                        
should be modified to:
 
                                          void finalize () {             super.finalize();           }                        
Mixing Logical Operators without Parentheses
 
   An expression containing multiple logical operators together should be parenthesized properly. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          void oper () {             boolean a, b, c;             // do something             if( a || (b &amp;&amp; c) {               // do something               return;             }           }                        
the parenthesis should be used to clarify complex logical expression to the reader, as follows:
 
                                          void oper () {             boolean a, b, c;             // do something             if( a || (b &amp;&amp; c)) {               // do something               return;             }           }                        
No Assignments in Conditional Expressions
 
   Assignments within conditions should be avoided since they make the source code difficult to understand. For example, the following source code: 
                                          if ( (dir = new File(targetDir)).exists() ) {             // do something           }                        
should be replaced by:
 
                                          dir = new File(targetDir);           if( dir.exists() ) {             // do something           }                        
Supply Break or Comment in Case Statement
 
   Every time a case falls through and doesn&#39;t include a break statement, a comment should be added where the break statement would normally be. The break in the default case is redundant, but it prevents a fall-through error if later another case is added. Thus in the following source code: 
                                          switch( c ) {             case ‘n’:               result += ‘\n’;               break;             case ‘r’:               result += ‘\r’;               break;             case ′\″:               someFlag = true;             case ′\′″:               result += c;               break;             // some more code...           }                        
a/* falls through */comment should be added, as follows:
 
                                          switch( c ) {             case ‘n’:               result += ‘\n’;               break;             case ‘r’:               result += ‘\r’;               break;             case ′\″:               someFlag = true;               /* falls through */;             case ′\′″:               result += c;               break;             // some more code...           }                        
Use ‘equals’ Instead of ‘=’
 
   The ‘=’ operator is used on strings to check if two string objects are identical. However, in most cases, one would like to check if two strings have the same value. In these cases, the ‘equals’ method should be used. Thus, the following source code: 
                                          void func (String str1, String str2) {             if(str1 == str2) {               // do something             }           }                        
should be replaced by:
 
                                          void func (String str1, String str2) {             if( str1.equals(str2)) {               // do something             }           }                        
Use ‘L’ Instead Of ‘l’ at the end of integer constant
 
   It is difficult to distinguish between lower case letter ‘l’ and digit ‘1’. As far as the letter ‘l’ can be used as a long modifier at the end of integer constant, it can be mixed with the digit. Thus, it is better to use an uppercase ‘L’. In the following example: 
                                          void func () {             long var = 0x0001111l;           }                        
the trailing ‘l’ letter at the end of integer constants should be replaced with ‘L,’ as follows:
 
                                          void func () {             long var = 0x0001111L;           }                        
Use of the ‘Synchronized’ Modifier
 
   The ‘synchronized’ modifier on methods can sometimes cause confusion during maintenance and debugging. This rule recommends avoiding the use of this modifier and encourages using ‘synchronized’ statements instead. Thus, in the following source code: 
                                          class UOSM {             public synchronized void method () {               // do something             }           }                        
synchronized statements should be used instead of synchronized methods, as follows:
 
   
     
       
         
             
             
           
             
                 
                 
             
           
          
             
                 
               class UOSM { 
             
             
                 
                 public void method () { 
             
             
                 
                   synchronized(this) { 
             
             
                 
                     // do something 
             
             
                 
                   } 
             
             
                 
                 } 
             
             
                 
               } 
             
             
                 
                 
             
          
         
       
     
   
   SUPERFLUOUS CONTENT 
   Duplicate Import Declarations 
   There should be only one import declaration that imports a particular class/package. The following source code violates this audit by containing multiple import declarations for java.io.* and java.sql.time: 
                                          package audit;           import java.io.*;           import java.io.*;           import java.sql.Time;           import java.sql.Time;           class DID {           }                        
To correct the above code, duplicate declarations should be deleted.
 
Don&#39;t Import the Package the Source File Belongs To
 
   No. classes or interfaces need to be imported from the package that the source code file belongs to. Everything in that package is available without explicit import statements. Thus, the following source code contains the unnecessary import of “audit”: 
                                          package audit;           import java.awt.*;           import audit.*;           public class DIPSFBT {           }                        
To correct the above code, the unnecessary import statement should be deleted.
 
Explicit Import of the java.lang Classes
 
   Explicit import of classes from the package ‘java.lang’ should not be performed. Thus, in the following source code, the unnecessary import of “java.lang.*” should be deleted: 
                                          package audit;           import java.lang.*;           class EIOJLC {}                        
Equality Operations on Boolean Arguments
 
   Avoid performing equality operations on boolean operands. True and false literals should not be used in conditional clauses, as shown below: 
                                          int oper (boolean bOk) {             if(bOk) {               return 1;             }             while ( bOk == true ) {               // do something             }             return ( bOk == false )? 1 : 0;           }                        
The above source code should be replaced with the following:
 
                                          int oper (boolean bOk) {             if(bOk) {               return 1;             }             while ( bOk) {               // do something             }             return( !bOk) ? 1 : 0;           }                        
Imported Items must be Used
 
   It is not legal to import a class or an interface and never use it. This audit checks classes and interfaces that are explicitly imported with their names, not those with import of a complete package, i.e., using an asterisk. If unused class and interface imports are omitted, the amount of meaningless source code is reduced, thus the amount of code to be understood by a reader is minimized. Thus, the unnecessary import of “stack” in the following source code should be deleted: 
                                          import java.awt.*;           import java.util.Dictionary;           import java.util.Hashtable;           import java.util.Stack;           import java.util.Vector;           class IIMBU {             Dictionary dict;             void func (Vector vec) {               Hashtable ht;               // do something             }           }                        
Unnecessary Casts
 
   This audit checks for the use of type casts that are not necessary. A cast is a Java™ language construct that performs a narrowing conversion. Thus, in the following example the cast “(elephant) el” is not necessary since el is already defined as type elephant: 
                                          class Animal {}           class Elephant extends Animal {             void func () {               int i;               float f = (float) i;               Elephant e1;               Elephant e2 = (Elephant) e1;               Animal a;               Elephant e;               a = (Animal) e;             }           }                        
In the above example, the unnecessary cast should be deleted to improve readability.
 
Unnecessary ‘Instanceof’ Evaluations
 
   This audit determines whether the runtime type of the left-hand side expression is the same as the one specified on the right-hand side. Thus, in the following source code, the “if-loops” are unnecessary since both statements within the if loop are defined to be true. In particular, “Animal animal” defines animal as type Animal, “Elephant elephant” defines elephant as type Elephant, and “class Elephant extends Animal { }” defines Elephant to be the same type as Animal. Thus, elephant is also defined as type “Animal.” 
                                          class UIOE {             void operation () {               Animal animal;               Elephant elephant;               if( animal instanceof Animal) {                 doSomething1(animal);               }               if( elephant instanceof Animal) {                 doSomething2(elephant);               }             }           }           class Animal {}           class Elephant extends Animal {}                        
To correct the above code, the if-loops can be removed, as follows:
 
                                          class UIOE {             void operation () {               Animal animal;               Elephant elephant;               doSomething1(animal);               doSomething2(elephant);             }           }           class Animal {}           class Elephant extends Animal {}                        
Unused Local Variables and Formal Parameters
 
   Local variables and formal parameters declarations must be used. Thus, in the following source code, the unused local variables and formal parameters should not be used. 
                                          int oper (int unused_param, int used_param) {             int unused_var;             return 2 * used_param;           }                        
Use of Obsolete Interface Modifier
 
   The modifier ‘abstract,’ as shown in the following code, is considered obsolete and should not be used:
         abstract interface UOOIM { }
 
The above source code should be replaced by the following:
   interface UOOIM { }
 
Use of Unnecessary Interface Member Modifiers
       

   All interface operations are implicitly public and abstract. All interface attributes are implicitly public, final and static. Thus, the following source code contains unnecessary interface member modifiers: 
                                          interface UOUIMM {             int attr1;             public final static int ATTR2;             void oper1 ();             public abstract void oper2 ();           }                        
The above code may be corrected, as follows:
 
                                          interface UOUIMM {             int attr1;             final static int ATTR2;             void oper1 ();             void oper2 ();           }                        
Unused Private Class Member
 
   An unused class member might indicate a logical flaw in the program. The class declaration has to be reconsidered in order to determine the need of the unused member(s). Thus, in the following source code, the unnecessary members, i.e., “bad_attr” and “bad_oper( ),” should be removed. 
                                          class UPCM {                         private int bad_attr;           private int good_attr;           private void bad_oper () {                         // do something . . . ;                         }           private void good_oper1 () {                         good_attr = 10;                         }           public void good_oper2() {                         good_oper1();                         }                 }                    
Unnecessary Return Statement Parentheses
 
   A return statement with a value should not use parentheses unless it makes the return value more obvious in some way. For example, the following source code violates this audit: 
                              return;       return (myDisk.size());       return (sizeOk ? size: defaultSize);                    
and should be replaced by:
 
                              return;       return myDisk.size();       return (sizeOk ? size : defaultSize);                    
Locating Source Code Referenced by Verification Tool
 
   The QA module is a verification tool. Conventional compilers are also verification tools, which provide messages to the user if an error is detected within the source code. The software development tool in accordance with methods and systems consistent with the present invention uses the error message from the verification tool to locate the source code corresponding to the message. Thus, the developer can use the improved software development tool to determine which line of source code corresponds to an error message from a verification tool. The verification tool may be part of the software development tool, or it may be external to the software development tool. 
     FIGS. 20A and B  depict a flow diagram illustrating how the software development tool allows a developer to quickly locate source code referenced by a verification tool. The first step performed by the software development tool is to display the textual representation of the source code in a project (step  2000  in FIG.  20 A). The software development tool simultaneously displays the graphical representation of the source code in the project (step  2002 ). For example,  FIG. 21  depicts screen  2100  with both a textual representation  2102  and a graphical representation  2104  of a project  2106 . The screen  2100  also displays the error messages  2108  received from the audit option of the QA module. The error messages  2108  include the severity  2110  of the message, the abbreviation  2112  used to identify the message, an explanation  2114  of the message, the element  2116  in which the error occurs, the item  2118  to which the error refers, the file  2120  in which the error occurs, and the line number  2122  of the source code where the error occurs. 
   The choices for the severity  2110  are low, normal, and high. An example of an audit error message having low severity is “Avoid Too Long Files” (“ATLF”), which occurs when a file contains more than 2000 lines. According to standard code conventions for the Java™ programming language, having more than 2000 lines are cumbersome and should be avoided. Because this audit identifies a suggested format that will not affect the compilation or execution of the source code, it is considered a low severity message. The explanation  2114  of this message is “Avoid Too Long Files,” and the message uses the abbreviation  2112  “ATLF.” This message relates to a file that contains more than 2000 lines. Thus, the item  2118  to which the message occurs identifies the file name. The file  2120  in which the error occurs also identifies the same file, but includes the path to the file with the file name. With the ATLF audit, the line number  2122  of the source code where the error occurs is  2001  because the audit feature will not identify this error until it reaches the 2001st line of the source code. An example of a “normal” severity message is “Use Abbreviated Assignment Operator” (“UAAO”). The abbreviated assignment operator is preferred in order to write programs more rapidly and because some compilers run faster using abbreviated assignment operators. Although the failure to use the abbreviated assignment operator may slow the compilation of the source code, it will not prevent the program from compiling or executing properly, and is thus not a high severity message. Because of its effect on the compilation time, however, the failure to use the abbreviated assignment operator is considered a normal severity message rather than a low severity message. Finally, a high priority message is one that will prevent the source code from executing properly. For example, “Avoid Hiding Inherited Static Methods” (“AHISM”) identifies when inherited static operations are hidden by child classes. Thus, if the same term is used to define a class field in both a parent and a child class, the software development tool will use the same definition in both cases because the term is defined more than once within the project, thus making it ambiguous. 
   Returning to the flow diagram in  FIG. 20A , when a developer chooses one of the messages  2108 , the software development tool receives the message  2108  from the verification tool (step  2004 ). As discussed above, the message  2108  includes the file  2120  in which the error occurs and the line number  2122  of the source code where the error occurs. Thus, in the example shown, the software development tool obtains this information and uses it to locate the source code corresponding to the message  2108  (step  2006 ). If the text of the source code corresponding to the message  2108  is not displayed (step  2008 ), the software development tool displays the source code corresponding to the message (step  2010 ). The software development tool then displays the source code corresponding to the message in a visually distinctive manner, e.g., the software development tool may highlight, italicize, or bold the source code, or it may display the code in a different color or with a different color background (step  2012  in FIG.  20 B). Thus, if a developer chooses the “Avoids Too Long Lines” message  2202  shown on the screen  2200  in  FIG. 22 , the software development tool finds line number  2204  located in the file  2206  at C:/Together4.2/samples/java/Hello/Hello . . . , determines that the line is not currently displayed, and displays it in a visually distinctive manner, as shown on the screen  2300  in FIG.  23 . The software development tool then determines whether the graphical representation  2306  of the source code corresponding to the message is displayed (step  2014 ). If the graphical representation is not displayed, the software development tool displays the graphical representation  2306  of the source code corresponding to the message (step  2016 ). The software development tool then displays the graphical representation  2306  of the source code in a visually distinctive manner, e.g., the software development tool may highlight the graphical representation  2306 , change its color, or change the color of its background (step  2018 ). Thus, in the example shown, the software development tool determines that the graphical representation  2306  of the message is shown, and modifies its representation in a visually distinctive manner. 
   Although discussed in terms of the audit function of the QA module, the software development tool of the present invention may also use other verification tools to receive messages and locate specific lines of source code referenced by the message. These verification tools may be integrated into the software development tool, as in the case of the QA module, or may be external to the software development tool. Any verification tool known in the art may be used, and any known technique to locate the line of source code may be used. 
   While various embodiments of the present invention have been described, it will be apparent to those of skill in the art that many more embodiments and implementations are possible that are within the scope of this invention. Accordingly, the present invention is not to be restricted except in light of the attached claims and their equivalents.