Talk:Function point
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
alternative methods
[edit]Other alternative methods should be mentioned here or otherwise in Software metric
Alternatives: Lines of Code, Mark II, COSMIC FFP (now an ISO standard 19761), 3D, FP+
merge with Software metrics
[edit]Function points are a little past their prime. They were bigger in the 80's and 90's but the frequency of mention in literature is almost vanished. I would make this one of the historica
I disagree with this opinion, Functional sizing in FP is the only engineering metric applicable to software size. The software industry has a poor reputation and needs to sharpen it's game. There is much to gain from the original methods (IFPUG - based) and even more to benefit from the modern version - COSMIC FSM. They have had a mixed reputation in the past, but like many metrics if misused can give misleading results. The industry is hanging on the uses of story points which is not even a metric at all. It is high time that the industry embraced suitable measurement and this can start here by allowing functional sizing to be properly represented in wikipedia.--Colinrhammond (talk) 16:41, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
- C-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- C-Class software articles
- Low-importance software articles
- C-Class software articles of Low-importance
- All Software articles
- C-Class Computer science articles
- Low-importance Computer science articles
- All Computing articles
- C-Class Systems articles
- Low-importance Systems articles
- Systems articles in software engineering
- WikiProject Systems articles