Document frickin huge scripts that are not mine

[BigDaddyO]

This probably runs along the lines of the mystical Easy Button, but is there anything existing that will help document .au3 scripts?

we are working on a really big project that we are automating with AutoIt and have outsourced the majority of the scripting.  I'm combining all the code into a single automated process that will allow kicking off the entire regression in a scheduled fashion.

My difficulties are that running a test script by itself works fine, but when you start combining and running the individual test functions one after the other things start to get screwy and values aren't right, and all sorts of freaky stuff starts happening.

 

So, I'm wondering if there is any existing tool out there that I can run against a main script that will trace and scour a script and all #include files to build a flow, almost like a visio type flow.

What functions are called and in what order

what variables are used within a function

what of those variables are global vs local, if Global are they being updated within the function?

are there any functions that are not used

are there any functions AutoIt, UDF, and otherwise that are not being checked for a return value prior to use.  example:  they are using $MyArray[_ArraySearch()] but if the _ArraySearch fails it returns -1 which crashes the script.

 

Thanks

[jchd]

Looks like you want an Astatine crystal delivered to your door 👻

Seriously I'm afraid you're on your own.

Finding such errors (or bugs or whatever you call that) would need to process the whole code to establish variants, invariants, pre- & post-conditions (all meanings taken from the original paper by Floyd http://www.cse.chalmers.se/edu/year/2017/course/TDA384_LP1/files/lectures/additional-material/AssigningMeanings1967.pdf) for every line of code AND formally find all places where the needed conditions could be violated. That AND is a big thing!

This is the same process (albeit that with Floyd it's expressed formally) that any programmer uses to mentally check that his/her code looks correct by simple line by line scrutiny (an error-prone process, as we all know).

While this would essentially solve your problems, that is a really huge task even for relatively simple code. Note that this is the exact converse of a newer and much more powerful formal method (the method B ) whith starts from formalized high level specifications, then adding more lower details until source code can be output, along with a formal (mathematical) proof that it is 100% correct w.r.t. formal specifications. The reference book about B is Assigning programs to meanings, by J. R. Abrial, but this is a hard to read text even for specialists of logic.

[AdamUL]

You could try using Tidy with the /gd switch to generate docs for each test script.  The report is a text file, but it might be something you could work with.  

https://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/scite/docs/SciTE4AutoIt3/Tidy.html

 

Adam

[argumentum]

5 hours ago, BigDaddyO said:

example:  they are using $MyArray[_ArraySearch()] but if the _ArraySearch fails it returns -1 which crashes the script.

..make sure each function is self sufficient with proper error returns. That if an expected value is not as such ( $aArray is not an array, etc. ) is checked for. All these will take extra .01 ms. or so, but is worth it in the long run. Tidy and that's it. 

 

5 hours ago, BigDaddyO said:

wondering if there is any existing tool out there

no clue. Don't remember seeing any.

[RTFC]

You could give CodeScanner a whirl (link in my sig below); it won't answer all your queries, but should help in tackling some of them.

[Jos]

5 hours ago, AdamUL said:

You could try using Tidy with the /gd switch to generate docs for each test script.  The report is a text file, but it might be something you could work with.  

https://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/scite/docs/SciTE4AutoIt3/Tidy.html

I hadn't looked at it for quite a while and saw the func xref wasn't working anymore correctly, so fixed that in the current beta. There also seem to be too many variable shown in that xref at the moment and will have a look at that later, but that does indeed show you a nice xref of which Func/Variable is "defined where" and "used where". 

Jos

Edited February 27, 2020 by Jos

[Jos]

5 hours ago, Jos said:

There also seem to be too many variable shown in that xref at the moment and will have a look at that later, but that does indeed show you a nice xref of which Func/Variable is "defined where" and "used where". 

Current Tidy Beta v19.1127.1402.2  will only list variables that start with $ or @ in the xref variable report.

Jos

[Gabrielos]

Is it possible to change which variables get listed?

[Jos]

8 hours ago, Gabrielos said:

Is it possible to change which variables get listed?

Not sure what you are asking here.

[jitb]

I know that you have probably thought of this

- split it up,  Place all scripts in folder, prefix 05-nn...,10-nn

- To be run in order

-Run someting like Documenter on the scripts (Old probable will need updating)

    +will list all functions[line], all variables in function{line] and all unused functions and variables

[Jos]

4 hours ago, jitb said:

+will list all functions[line], all variables in function{line] and all unused functions and variables

This yes, which is what tidy does. As to the rest: no clue what you really want there yet, but have a go I would sat.