Starting a conversation with Statistics has long been a sign being too lazy to make a mechanism to include in the Hypothesis.
It has extended to, giving the stats and making the theory without caring about adding a mechanism to the hypothesis.
That is what leads to “stats is evil”.
Because, on top of the number of lines, it will also matter what kind of code is there in the line.
One can easily fill a 100 lines of code, hardcoding a lookup table with minimal logic in it. At the same time, a few lines of changed code might make a big difference.
Then, if multiple significant changes are done to a single feature, they all might be given in a single commit, making the number of commits very low, while having the changes spread across several different features, might require separate commits, increasing the count.
I’ll take these stats as a fun little number, usable to make some good looking graphs, but that’s all.
Starting a conversation with Statistics has long been a sign being too lazy to make a mechanism to include in the Hypothesis. It has extended to, giving the stats and making the theory without caring about adding a mechanism to the hypothesis.
That is what leads to “stats is evil”.
Because, on top of the number of lines, it will also matter what kind of code is there in the line.
One can easily fill a 100 lines of code, hardcoding a lookup table with minimal logic in it. At the same time, a few lines of changed code might make a big difference. Then, if multiple significant changes are done to a single feature, they all might be given in a single commit, making the number of commits very low, while having the changes spread across several different features, might require separate commits, increasing the count.
I’ll take these stats as a fun little number, usable to make some good looking graphs, but that’s all.