Difference in openjdk-6, openjdk-7, and openjdk-8 in terms of SLOC count?

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm calculating SLOC (Source Lines of Code) count of some of the packages for my research purposes. I'm downloading source of packages for different years from Debian snapshots. For most of the packages SLOC count increase with year, like for Wireshark in 2010 SLOC is less then 2011 it is more and keep on increasing till 2018.
But for OpenJDK 6, 7, and 8, it's different. openjdk-7 has a smaller SLOC count than openjdk-6. openjdk-8 has a smaller SLOC count than openjdk-7. Why is it so?
Is there some problem in Debian snapshots? Perhaps the complete source is not available, or is it like this in general for this package?
debian source snapshot openjdk
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm calculating SLOC (Source Lines of Code) count of some of the packages for my research purposes. I'm downloading source of packages for different years from Debian snapshots. For most of the packages SLOC count increase with year, like for Wireshark in 2010 SLOC is less then 2011 it is more and keep on increasing till 2018.
But for OpenJDK 6, 7, and 8, it's different. openjdk-7 has a smaller SLOC count than openjdk-6. openjdk-8 has a smaller SLOC count than openjdk-7. Why is it so?
Is there some problem in Debian snapshots? Perhaps the complete source is not available, or is it like this in general for this package?
debian source snapshot openjdk
dwheeler.com/sloccount
â slmâ¦
Sep 3 at 4:06
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm calculating SLOC (Source Lines of Code) count of some of the packages for my research purposes. I'm downloading source of packages for different years from Debian snapshots. For most of the packages SLOC count increase with year, like for Wireshark in 2010 SLOC is less then 2011 it is more and keep on increasing till 2018.
But for OpenJDK 6, 7, and 8, it's different. openjdk-7 has a smaller SLOC count than openjdk-6. openjdk-8 has a smaller SLOC count than openjdk-7. Why is it so?
Is there some problem in Debian snapshots? Perhaps the complete source is not available, or is it like this in general for this package?
debian source snapshot openjdk
I'm calculating SLOC (Source Lines of Code) count of some of the packages for my research purposes. I'm downloading source of packages for different years from Debian snapshots. For most of the packages SLOC count increase with year, like for Wireshark in 2010 SLOC is less then 2011 it is more and keep on increasing till 2018.
But for OpenJDK 6, 7, and 8, it's different. openjdk-7 has a smaller SLOC count than openjdk-6. openjdk-8 has a smaller SLOC count than openjdk-7. Why is it so?
Is there some problem in Debian snapshots? Perhaps the complete source is not available, or is it like this in general for this package?
debian source snapshot openjdk
debian source snapshot openjdk
edited Sep 3 at 12:09
Stephen Kitt
147k22321388
147k22321388
asked Sep 2 at 20:36
Hazel
232
232
dwheeler.com/sloccount
â slmâ¦
Sep 3 at 4:06
add a comment |Â
dwheeler.com/sloccount
â slmâ¦
Sep 3 at 4:06
dwheeler.com/sloccount
â slmâ¦
Sep 3 at 4:06
dwheeler.com/sloccount
â slmâ¦
Sep 3 at 4:06
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
If you look at the contents of the OpenJDK source packages, youâÂÂll see that most of their source code is shipped inside tarballs inside the packages. If you run David A. WheelerâÂÂs SLOCCount on the extracted package source only, it wonâÂÂt count the code in those tarballs, so youâÂÂll get a very partial count.
To properly compare the source code sizes, youâÂÂll need to extract the tarballs before running sloccount. Doing this gives the following stats (on the versions I analysed):
openjdk-6 openjdk-7 openjdk-8
java: 2860304 (68.33%) 3232714 (72.32%) 3601973 (67.00%)
cpp: 648574 (15.49%) 671628 (15.03%) 892040 (16.59%)
ansic: 584813 (13.97%) 466742 (10.44%) 374378 (6.96%)
sh: 49935 (1.19%) 45608 (1.02%) 32891 (0.61%)
xml: 23937 (0.57%) 25927 (0.58%) 456037 (8.48%)
objc: 13062 (0.29%) 13557 (0.25%)
asm: 14125 (0.34%) 11555 (0.26%) 3508 (0.07%)
perl: 2258 (0.05%) 1220 (0.03%) 198 (0.00%)
pascal: 1089 (0.03%)
awk: 631 (0.02%) 687 (0.02%) 367 (0.01%)
python: 310 (0.01%) 310 (0.01%) 800 (0.01%)
haskell: 195 (0.00%) 195 (0.00%)
sed: 172 (0.00%)
cs: 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%)
ruby: 44 (0.00%) 44 (0.00%)
jsp: 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%)
csh: 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%)
showing an increase in size (note however that the scope of the packages has changed with time too).
yes, you are right. I extracted all the tar's..now its calculating correct. Thanks you so much.
â Hazel
Sep 3 at 19:10
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
If you look at the contents of the OpenJDK source packages, youâÂÂll see that most of their source code is shipped inside tarballs inside the packages. If you run David A. WheelerâÂÂs SLOCCount on the extracted package source only, it wonâÂÂt count the code in those tarballs, so youâÂÂll get a very partial count.
To properly compare the source code sizes, youâÂÂll need to extract the tarballs before running sloccount. Doing this gives the following stats (on the versions I analysed):
openjdk-6 openjdk-7 openjdk-8
java: 2860304 (68.33%) 3232714 (72.32%) 3601973 (67.00%)
cpp: 648574 (15.49%) 671628 (15.03%) 892040 (16.59%)
ansic: 584813 (13.97%) 466742 (10.44%) 374378 (6.96%)
sh: 49935 (1.19%) 45608 (1.02%) 32891 (0.61%)
xml: 23937 (0.57%) 25927 (0.58%) 456037 (8.48%)
objc: 13062 (0.29%) 13557 (0.25%)
asm: 14125 (0.34%) 11555 (0.26%) 3508 (0.07%)
perl: 2258 (0.05%) 1220 (0.03%) 198 (0.00%)
pascal: 1089 (0.03%)
awk: 631 (0.02%) 687 (0.02%) 367 (0.01%)
python: 310 (0.01%) 310 (0.01%) 800 (0.01%)
haskell: 195 (0.00%) 195 (0.00%)
sed: 172 (0.00%)
cs: 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%)
ruby: 44 (0.00%) 44 (0.00%)
jsp: 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%)
csh: 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%)
showing an increase in size (note however that the scope of the packages has changed with time too).
yes, you are right. I extracted all the tar's..now its calculating correct. Thanks you so much.
â Hazel
Sep 3 at 19:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
If you look at the contents of the OpenJDK source packages, youâÂÂll see that most of their source code is shipped inside tarballs inside the packages. If you run David A. WheelerâÂÂs SLOCCount on the extracted package source only, it wonâÂÂt count the code in those tarballs, so youâÂÂll get a very partial count.
To properly compare the source code sizes, youâÂÂll need to extract the tarballs before running sloccount. Doing this gives the following stats (on the versions I analysed):
openjdk-6 openjdk-7 openjdk-8
java: 2860304 (68.33%) 3232714 (72.32%) 3601973 (67.00%)
cpp: 648574 (15.49%) 671628 (15.03%) 892040 (16.59%)
ansic: 584813 (13.97%) 466742 (10.44%) 374378 (6.96%)
sh: 49935 (1.19%) 45608 (1.02%) 32891 (0.61%)
xml: 23937 (0.57%) 25927 (0.58%) 456037 (8.48%)
objc: 13062 (0.29%) 13557 (0.25%)
asm: 14125 (0.34%) 11555 (0.26%) 3508 (0.07%)
perl: 2258 (0.05%) 1220 (0.03%) 198 (0.00%)
pascal: 1089 (0.03%)
awk: 631 (0.02%) 687 (0.02%) 367 (0.01%)
python: 310 (0.01%) 310 (0.01%) 800 (0.01%)
haskell: 195 (0.00%) 195 (0.00%)
sed: 172 (0.00%)
cs: 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%)
ruby: 44 (0.00%) 44 (0.00%)
jsp: 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%)
csh: 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%)
showing an increase in size (note however that the scope of the packages has changed with time too).
yes, you are right. I extracted all the tar's..now its calculating correct. Thanks you so much.
â Hazel
Sep 3 at 19:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
If you look at the contents of the OpenJDK source packages, youâÂÂll see that most of their source code is shipped inside tarballs inside the packages. If you run David A. WheelerâÂÂs SLOCCount on the extracted package source only, it wonâÂÂt count the code in those tarballs, so youâÂÂll get a very partial count.
To properly compare the source code sizes, youâÂÂll need to extract the tarballs before running sloccount. Doing this gives the following stats (on the versions I analysed):
openjdk-6 openjdk-7 openjdk-8
java: 2860304 (68.33%) 3232714 (72.32%) 3601973 (67.00%)
cpp: 648574 (15.49%) 671628 (15.03%) 892040 (16.59%)
ansic: 584813 (13.97%) 466742 (10.44%) 374378 (6.96%)
sh: 49935 (1.19%) 45608 (1.02%) 32891 (0.61%)
xml: 23937 (0.57%) 25927 (0.58%) 456037 (8.48%)
objc: 13062 (0.29%) 13557 (0.25%)
asm: 14125 (0.34%) 11555 (0.26%) 3508 (0.07%)
perl: 2258 (0.05%) 1220 (0.03%) 198 (0.00%)
pascal: 1089 (0.03%)
awk: 631 (0.02%) 687 (0.02%) 367 (0.01%)
python: 310 (0.01%) 310 (0.01%) 800 (0.01%)
haskell: 195 (0.00%) 195 (0.00%)
sed: 172 (0.00%)
cs: 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%)
ruby: 44 (0.00%) 44 (0.00%)
jsp: 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%)
csh: 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%)
showing an increase in size (note however that the scope of the packages has changed with time too).
If you look at the contents of the OpenJDK source packages, youâÂÂll see that most of their source code is shipped inside tarballs inside the packages. If you run David A. WheelerâÂÂs SLOCCount on the extracted package source only, it wonâÂÂt count the code in those tarballs, so youâÂÂll get a very partial count.
To properly compare the source code sizes, youâÂÂll need to extract the tarballs before running sloccount. Doing this gives the following stats (on the versions I analysed):
openjdk-6 openjdk-7 openjdk-8
java: 2860304 (68.33%) 3232714 (72.32%) 3601973 (67.00%)
cpp: 648574 (15.49%) 671628 (15.03%) 892040 (16.59%)
ansic: 584813 (13.97%) 466742 (10.44%) 374378 (6.96%)
sh: 49935 (1.19%) 45608 (1.02%) 32891 (0.61%)
xml: 23937 (0.57%) 25927 (0.58%) 456037 (8.48%)
objc: 13062 (0.29%) 13557 (0.25%)
asm: 14125 (0.34%) 11555 (0.26%) 3508 (0.07%)
perl: 2258 (0.05%) 1220 (0.03%) 198 (0.00%)
pascal: 1089 (0.03%)
awk: 631 (0.02%) 687 (0.02%) 367 (0.01%)
python: 310 (0.01%) 310 (0.01%) 800 (0.01%)
haskell: 195 (0.00%) 195 (0.00%)
sed: 172 (0.00%)
cs: 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%) 72 (0.00%)
ruby: 44 (0.00%) 44 (0.00%)
jsp: 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%) 24 (0.00%)
csh: 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%) 3 (0.00%)
showing an increase in size (note however that the scope of the packages has changed with time too).
edited Sep 3 at 7:07
answered Sep 2 at 21:09
Stephen Kitt
147k22321388
147k22321388
yes, you are right. I extracted all the tar's..now its calculating correct. Thanks you so much.
â Hazel
Sep 3 at 19:10
add a comment |Â
yes, you are right. I extracted all the tar's..now its calculating correct. Thanks you so much.
â Hazel
Sep 3 at 19:10
yes, you are right. I extracted all the tar's..now its calculating correct. Thanks you so much.
â Hazel
Sep 3 at 19:10
yes, you are right. I extracted all the tar's..now its calculating correct. Thanks you so much.
â Hazel
Sep 3 at 19:10
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f466449%2fdifference-in-openjdk-6-openjdk-7-and-openjdk-8-in-terms-of-sloc-count%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
dwheeler.com/sloccount
â slmâ¦
Sep 3 at 4:06