On 7/25/2013 6:00 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> Defect Density: 0.05 > > = defects per thousand lines = 20/400 > > Anything under 1 is good. The release above reports Samba now at .6. > http://www.pcworld.com/article/2038244/linux-code-is-the-benchmark-of-quality-study-concludes.html > > reports Linux 3.8 as having the same for 7.6 million lines. > >> Total defects: 1,054 >> Outstanding: 21 (Coverity Connect shows less) >> Dismissed: 222 > > This implies that they accept our designation of some things as False > Positives or Intentional. Does Coverity do any review of such > designations, so a project cannot cheat? I found the answer here https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5wQCOK_TiRiMWVqQ0xPaDEzbkU/edit Coverity Integrity Level 1 is 1 (defect/1000 lines) Level 2 is .1 (we have passed that) Level 3 is .01 + no major defects + <20% (all all defects?) false positives as that is their normal rate.# A higher false positive rates requires auditing by Coverity. They claim "A higher false positive rate indicates misconfiguration, usage of unusual idioms, or incorrect diagnosis of a large number of defects." They else add "or a flaw in our analysis." # Since false positives should stay constant as true positives are reduced toward 0, false / all should tend toward 1 (100%) if I understand the ratio correctly. > >> Fixed: 811 >> >> http://i.imgur.com/NoELjcj.jpg >> http://i.imgur.com/eJSzTUX.jpg -- Terry Jan Reedy
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4