Compuware helps enfoce the naming convention

Some recently pointed out to me that Compuware offers a product to help enforce the .NET Design Guidelines naming conventions.  Has anyone tried it out?


Comments (6)

  1. Steve Hall says:

    I’ve been using DevPartner CodeReview ever since it came out for VB6 (8-10 years ago?) and have required its use on several large VB6 projects. (I had originally bought the separate products that became DevPartner Studio, including BoundsChecker, CodeReview, and FaultTracker. A few years ago it was extended with profiling and coverage analysis tools. Although I originally bought the pieces for C++ debugging, the VB components that came when DevPartner was finally bundled came in handy.) The one development method rule I instituted was: Check-In ONLY after sucessfully passing CodeReview rule enforcement. The contractors that I had working on some code didn’t like following that rule, but came around when it became apparent that a majority of their bugs were a result of silly non-standard naming conventions that caused them to get confused between pointers, pointers-of-pointers, and references in their VB code. (We were writing several NT services at the time and doing a lot of Win32 interop…)

    When .NET came about, my prayers were answered and CodeReview was extended for the .NET naming conventions (since I was abandoning Hungarian notation). I haven’t done an extensive comparison against FxCop or what’s built into VSTS2005…probably since I’ve got DevPartner Studio (and don’t have a few man-days to spare). (I did a quick 10-minute comparison a year ago agsinst FxCop and Code Review covered all of the major coding conventions which I was interested in enforcing…)

    David Boschmans’ blog entry is an excellent overview of CodeReview and I agree with his opinions: can’t really add much to what he says!

  2. Enforcing naming conventions

  3. Doesn’t the English naming convention mandate ‘enfoce’ to be spelled ‘enforce’? 😉

  4. We are using DevPartner in our shop. The overview of David is OK and stay tuned for Security Checker because I like it already.

    One minor issue (although great for the licenses), you need VS.NET to run the tools, there is no way (or not found a way) to run the tools in the automatic build process with Nant from the commandline as FxCop does.

  5. anon says:

    In my experience, fxCop works just as well, if not better than this product at enforcing naming conventions.

    The one thing that Compuware’s product does that I liked (but not enough to justify the purchase price) was enforcing formatting standards in code.

  6. We used DevPartner 6.5 a few years back for our vb6 applications although it didn’t get much use. I don’t think our company was ready for it and it became shelfware unfortunatly. We did attempt to use some of the code standard tools but it was difficult to tweak and until you did so you got an abundance of false hits. I haven’t used the .Net version but there are an a lot of excellent open source and/or low cost alternatives to functionality in that suite of apps (eg fxcop, ants profiler, .Net memory profiler, ncoverage, etc). Most recently I’ve been evaluating VS 2005 Team System and found even less reason to move to Devpartner especially if your company has maintenance because I believe it will replace the enterprise + versions of VS 2005 and you get many more tools then devpartner (new source code control, modeling, defect tracking, load testing,etc). I spent a couple hours on the phone with with Compuware this last friday I was frank with them about VS 2005 Team System but I wanted to hear what value they could add in addition or above this system. I’m going to be speaking with one of their sales people and actually on e of their engineers in regards to this in the coming weeks. I’d be happy to share my results with you if you’d like. All in all they make good quality products but there are more low cost or free alternatives out there.

    Josh Carlisle

Skip to main content