Re: Now 376175 lines of code - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ross J. Reedstrom
Subject Re: Now 376175 lines of code
Date
Msg-id 20000511102342.B10872@rice.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Now 376175 lines of code  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Now 376175 lines of code
Re: Now 376175 lines of code
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 01:45:31AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > I did a distclean on 7.0, and ran 'wc' on all the *.[chly] files, and
> > got a much larger number than what we got from Berkeley.
> >     376175
> > Seems someone has been busy.  :-)
> 
> Forgive a newbie --- what was the count for the original Berkeley code?
> Do you have the same numbers for other milestones?

Not that I'm a big believer in kloc as a measure of productivity (oh,
Bruce just said busy, didn't he? That's a different story...), I happen
to have a couple historical trees laying around, starting with the last
one I found at Berkeley:
 postgres-v4r2           244581 postgres95-1.09         178976 postgresql-6.1.1        200709 postgresql-6.3.2
260809postgresql-6.4.0        297479 postgresql-6.4.2        297918 postgresql-6.5.3        331278   
 

Well, more than a couple trees, I guess (actually I unpacked tarballs
for most of these)

HTH,
Ross
-- 
Ross J. Reedstrom, Ph.D., <reedstrm@rice.edu> 
NSBRI Research Scientist/Programmer
Computer and Information Technology Institute
Rice University, 6100 S. Main St.,  Houston, TX 77005


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: Multibyte still broken
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: setproctitle() no longer used?