optirelop.blogg.se

Looking at the Wikipedia entry for Static Code Analysis:

Then Microsoft releases a tool called StyleCop, which performs analysis on the actual source code looking for “best practice” violations partially based on the Framework Design Guidelines but also based on some internal code standards used by various teams at Microsoft. To remedy this situation, FxCop 1.36 Beta is released which brings FxCop closer in-line with the integrated analysis. One is tightly integrated in to Visual Studio and the other isn’t integrated at all. This built-in package uses (at a guess) 90% of the standalone FxCop release (the rules assemblies can be shared, the settings/options are almost the same, the analysis engines are almost the same as well), but includes some extra rules that weren’t part of the FxCop release and drops others that were.Īt this point we have two tools that are designed to do the exact same thing which yield different results.

Then, Visual Studio 2005 Team Edition is released, which includes a built-in utility to perform static analysis. This tool is a “static analysis tool” that looks at a compiled assembly and analyzes it for various violations of “best practice” design guidelines (mostly those spelled out in the Framework Design Guidelines. I think the real heart of the problem is that Visual Studio comes integrated “out of the box” with code analysis capabilities.įirst, Microsoft releases a tool called FxCop on GotDotNet. I know that calling StyleCop that name caused a lot of confusion since it was being compared to the built-in source analysis features of Visual Studio (at least the Team Edition SKUs of Visual Studio). Even with the newest releases of StyleCop, FxCop, and Visual Studio 2008, there is still a lot of room for improvement in the suite of technologies and products that make up what should probably be termed “Microsoft Source Analysis”.