You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I find a conflict between your implementation of CBO and the definition of the original CK paper. In the paper, authors say "CBO for a class is a count of the number of other classes to which it is coupled where two classes are coupled if methods declared in one class use methods or instance variables defined by the other class."
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Yes. I think that's an outdated definition. To me, if you have a link between class A and class B, there's coupling. That can be realised by, e.g., defining a list of type A, but never invoking A.
But one might want to know the coupling only about methods that are invoked in other classes. I'll rename this issue and leave it for someone who's willing to implement it!
mauricioaniche
changed the title
Conflict Between the CBO Implementation and the Definition of Original CK Paper
A coupling metric that only counts classes which the base class invokes a method
Mar 11, 2020
Hello,
I find a conflict between your implementation of CBO and the definition of the original CK paper. In the paper, authors say "CBO for a class is a count of the number of other classes to which it is coupled where two classes are coupled if methods declared in one class use methods or instance variables defined by the other class."
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: