Phần Mềm Vẽ Flowchart Online

[Teena Ruiter]

Sketchboardworks great with product teams, consultants and bigger organizations. Work remotely with your teammates at the same time on a web whiteboard, get immediate feedback and track their movements. Forget the email back and forth and the time-consuming meetings. Get free to work and collaborate from anywhere at any time.

Some thoughts develop only when you transplant them into another mind. Sketchboard provides a productive digital workspace that makes it easy to share ideas. You can visually collaborate on its infinite canvas to get feedback and brainstorm with your team.

Sketchboard revolves around ideas, not looks. We believe an organic feel encourages collaboration and feedback. Choose from over 400 sketch shapes with automated connections and note down your thoughts to bring your vision to life in no time.

Software development involves understanding very complex and abstract problems. Those need visualization using e.g. simple boxes, circles, and connections, using Sketchboard's UML diagram tool. Model your software based on design patterns or flowcharts using flowchart maker to draft your thoughts. Everyone understands the idea and works toward a common goal using the software design map created together, sketch UML diagramming for software developers.

Use digital notes to write down your scrum retrospectives and assign a different area of the board to each group. Having all your ideas digitized will make it easier to take action and achieve great results.

Screenshot an existing user interface and use freehand drawing to mark all the necessary changes. You can also combine freehand drawing with the existing sketch UX shapes to plan your UX flows from scratch. Build online flowcharts to visualize workflows, customer journeys, and many other design processes.

As a tester, screenshot problem areas and mark down those using a freehand drawing on top of the image. The visual element makes it easier for your team to get a clear view. This way your team can avoid the question back and forth, and bugs can get fixed faster.

I'm writing a blog article about McCabe Cyclomatic Complexity. I put a simple PL/SQL function in Toad that I expect should have a complexity score of 3, but Code Analysis is giving me a score of 5. You can see the code below, and I labeled each path with comments.

Each If-Then-Else predicate causes two paths, which are counted as Edges in the formula. Then you subtract out the number of Shapes. McCabe is only suppose to count unique pathway to program exit, which I can only count 3.

However, just to be clear, one if-then-else construct does not constitute more than one exit path unless there is an embedded if then else inside, which your example has. I counted each endIF as one exit point from an IF-Then-Else path.

that said, I am not an expert on this stuff either. And it does appear that you have found something that the developers need to look into, taste on the discrepancy we see between our calculations and the website's calculations.

McCabe's Cyclomatic Complexity is designed to measure distinct code paths as described in the two links you have listed. Most people will lay out graphs like the ones in the examples and the one you posted in order to calculate it manually through visualization. When you base the calculation off the interpretation of a visual graph, it requires you to generate the flowchart in order to do the calculation, but the ultimate goal is still to calculate logical pathways. Toad, instead, parses the code to count the individual logical pathways in the code. From Toad's perspective, it sees the following in your code:

From that perspective, it calculates one pathway for the overall program, two pathways for the first IF statement, followed by an additional two pathways for the second statement. That produces a total of 5 local pathways. It could be argued that it could be reduced to four (or even three) based on the interpretation of the visual graph. In that sense, perhaps it could be revisited to see if it could tweaked a bit; however, the overall goal of this metric is to keep the McCabe level low (generally a value of 10 or lower). In that sense, the calculated metric by Toad I believe still provides valuable information for the overall goal.

I agree, it's still a helpful metric, even if it slight deviates from the formulas I found online. There's probably many ways that visualization could have been drawn. Thanks for the explanation, John.

McCabe showed that the cyclomatic complexity of any structured program with only one entry point and one exit point is equal to the number of decision points (i.e., "if" statements or conditional loops) contained in that program plus one.

If the code had one single-condition IF statement, there would be two paths through the code: one where the IF statement evaluates to TRUE and another one where it evaluates to FALSE, so the complexity would be 2. Two nested single-condition IFs, or one IF with two conditions, would produce a complexity of 3.

The lesson maintainers for Intro to AI for GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, Museums) and the Library Carpentry Curriculum Advisory Committee (the LC-CAC) co-hosted a seven-hour online code sprint on Jan 31, 2024 to help contribute bug fixes, edits, and improvements to this popular new lesson.

With the aim of moving the beta lesson closer to a stable release and adding it to the core Library Carpentry curriculum, a diverse group of global participants gathered to work on the lesson. Fourteen participants with a range of affiliations and expertise collaborated together during shifts that were hosted throughout the Sprint by Phil Reed, Cody Hennesy, Tim Dennis, and Leigh Phan. Participants included representatives from Hugging Face (UK), the University of Manchester (UK), the Medical Research Council at the Gambia Unit at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the Smithsonian Institution, the State Archives of Baden-Wrttemberg (DE), The National Archives (UK), the University of California, Los Angeles (US), the University of Minnesota (US), and the University of Cape Town, South Africa.

Fourteen issues were closed during the Sprint, and seven Pull Requests were merged, while substantial documentation of improvements was made to existing Issues that will enable future contributions. Hand-drawn figures from the draft lesson were recreated as accessible SVG flowcharts, alt-text throughout the lesson was written for figures and images, and the remaining issues that remain to be addressed were documented thoroughly, clarifying the path forward for the lesson. Instructor feedback from a number of pilot lessons was also organised into a subset of Issues based on learner experiences and instructor observations.

3a8082e126