Measuring Wine's API completeness
Michael Jung
mjung at iss.tu-darmstadt.de
Thu Nov 10 16:24:39 CST 2005
Hello everybody,
talking to David Gümbel today the idea came up that it might be worth it to
introduce an additional section in the comments that document the exported
APIs. Something like 'IMPLEMENTATION STATUS', which would document the
author's opinion on how complete the implementation of a given API is. We
could introduce a classification scheme similar to:
STUBBED: Well, stubbed.
SKETCHY: Implemented just enough to make a specific application
or a small set of applications happy.
SUBSTANTIAL: Implemented a substantial part of the API (Perhaps as
much as is documented on MSDN).
COMPLETE: The author of this API considers the implementation complete.
REVIEWED: The code was reviewed for completeness and correctness.
It would be cool for various reasons, if we could do this in a machine
readable way:
1. We could generate the 'Wine DLLs Status' page automatically with every
release and we would have a historical record in cvs, which gives another
view on the progress we make.
2. We could establish guidelines like "A patch, which touches an API marked
REVIEWED can only go into cvs, if reviewed by n people other than the
author".
3. Tools like ITOMIG's ganymede, which try to give an estimate on how well an
application can be expected to work on wine by doing a static analysis to
figure out the used APIs, could apply this information.
Since COM classes, which account for a substantial part of win32, are not
directly exposed via the APIs, we probably would have to think about a
similar machine parsable documentation scheme here.
What do people think about this?
Bye,
--
Michael Jung
mjung at iss.tu-darmstadt.de
More information about the wine-devel
mailing list