NetBeans JavaScript Editor 0.2

Generic section

Generic criteria from QSOS version 1.6

Intrinsic durability
- Maturity
  - Age
    less than 3 months
    if between 3 months and 3 years
    after 3 years
    Not evaluated
  - Stability
    Unstable software with numerous releases or patches generating side effects
    Stabilized production release existing but old. Difficulties to stabilize developpement releases
    Stabilized software. Releases provide bug fixes corrections but mainly new functionalities
    Not evaluated
  - History, known problems
    Software knows several problems which can be prohibitive
    No know major problem or crisis
    History of good management of crisis situations
    Not evaluated
  - Fork probability, source of Forking
    Software is very likely to be forked in the future
    Software comes from a fork but has very few chances of being forked in the future
    Software has very little chance of being forked. It does not come from a fork either
    Not evaluated
- Adoption
  - Popularity (related to: general public, niche, ...)
    Very few users identified
    Detectable use on Internet
    Numerous users, numerous references
    Not evaluated
  - References
    None
    Few refences, non critical usages
    Often implemented for critical applications
    Not evaluated
  - Contributing Community
    No community or without real activity (forum, mailing list, ...)
    Existing community with a notable activity
    Strong community: big activity on forums, numerous contributors and advocates
    Not evaluated
  - books
    No book about the software
    Less than 5 books about the software are available
    More than 5 books about software are available, in several languages
    Not evaluated
- Development leadership
  - Leading team
    1 to 2 individuals involved, not clearly identified
    Between 2 and 5 independent people
    More than 5 people
    Not evaluated
  - Management style
    Complete dictatorship
    Enlightened despotism
    Council of architects with identified leader (e.g: KDE)
    Not evaluated
- Activity
  - Developers, identification, turnover
    Less than 3 developers, not clearly identified
    Between 4 and 7 developers, or more unidentified developers with important turnover
    More than 7 developers, very stable team
    Not evaluated
  - Activity on bugs
    Slow reactivity in forum or on mailing list, or nothing regarding bug fixes in releases note
    Detectable activity but without process clearly exposed, loing reaction/resolution time
    Strong reactivity based on roles and tasks assignment
    Not evaluated
  - Activity on functionalities
    No or few new functionalities
    Evolution of the product driven by the core team or by user's request without any clearly explained process
    Tool(s) to manage feature requests, strong interaction with roadmap
    Not evaluated
  - Activity on releases
    Very weak activity on both production and development releases
    Activity on production and developmenet releases. Frequent minor releases (bug fixes)
    Important activity with frequent minor releases (bugs fixes) and planned major releases relating to the roadmap forcast
    Not evaluated
Industrialized solution
- Independence of developments
  - Developments realized at 100% by employees of a single company
  - 60% maximum
  - 20% maximum
  Not evaluated
- Services
  - Training
    No offer of training identified
    Offer exists but is restricted geographically and to one language or is provided by a single contractor
    Rich offers provided by several contractors, in serveral languages and split into modules of gradual levels
    Not evaluated
  - Support
    No offer of support except via public forums and mailing lists
    Offer exists but is provided by a single contractor without strong commitment quality of services
    Multiple service providers with strong commitment (e.g: guaranteed resolution time)
    Not evaluated
  - Consulting
    No offer of consulting service
    Offer exists but is restricted geographically and to one language or is provided by a single contractor
    Consulting services provided by different contractors in serveral languages
    Not evaluated
- Documentation
  - No user documentation
  - Documentation exists but shifted in time, is restricted to one language or is poorly detailed
  - Documentation always up to date, translated and possibly adapted to different target readers (end user, sysadmin, manager, ...)
  Not evaluated
- Quality Assurance
  - Quality Assurance
    No QA process
    Identifies QA process but not much formalized and with no tool
    Automatic testing process included in code's life-cycle with publication of results
    Not evaluated
  - Tools
    No bug or feature request management tool
    Standard tools provided (for instance by a hosting forge) but poorly used
    Very active use of tools for roles/tasks allocation and progress monitoring
    Not evaluated
- Packaging
  - Source
    Software can't be installed from source without lot of work
    Installation from source is limited and depends on very strict conditions (OS, arch, lib, ...)
    Installation from source is easy
    Not evaluated
  - Debian
    The software is not packaged for Debian
    A Debian package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    The software is packaged in the distribution
    Not evaluated
  - FreeBSD
    The software is not packaged for FreeBSD
    A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    A official port exists in FreeBSD
    Not evaluated
  - HP-UX
    The software is not packaged for HP-UX
    A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    A stable package is provided for HP-UX
    Not evaluated
  - MacOSX
    The software is not packaged for MacOSX
    A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    The software is packaged in the distribution
    Not evaluated
  - Mandriva
    The software is not packaged for Mandriva
    A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    The software is packaged in the distribution
    Not evaluated
  - NetBSD
    The software is not packaged for NetBSD
    A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    A official port exists in NetBSD
    Not evaluated
  - OpenBSD
    The software is not packaged for OpenBSD
    A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    A official port exists in OpenBSD
    Not evaluated
  - RedHat
    The software is not packaged for RedHat/Fedora
    A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    The software is packaged in the distribution
    Not evaluated
  - Solaris
    The software is not packaged for Solaris
    A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support (e.g: SunFreeware.com )
    The software is supported by Sun for Solaris
    Not evaluated
  - SuSE
    The software is not packaged for SuSE
    A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
    The software is packaged in the distribution
    Not evaluated
  - Windows
    The project can't be installed on Windows
    A package exists but it is limited or has important issues or just cover some specific Windows release (e.g: Windows2000 and WindowsXP)
    Windows is full supported and a package is provided
    Not evaluated
Exploitability
- Ease of use, ergonomics
  - Difficult to use, requires an in depth knowledge of the software functionality
  - Austere and very technical ergonomics
  - GUI including help functions and elaborated ergonomics
  Not evaluated
- Administration / Monitoring
  - No administrative or monitoring functionalities
  - Existing, functionalities but uncomplete and or need improvement
  - Complete and easy-to-use administration and monitoring functionalities. Possible integration with external tools (e.g: SNMP, syslog, ...)
  Not evaluated
Technical adaptability
- Modularity
  - Monolithic software
  - Presence of hight level modules allowing a first level of software adaptation
  - Modular conception, allowing easy adaptation of the software by selecting or creating modules
  Not evaluated
- Code modification
  - Everything by hand
  - Recompilation possible but complex without any tools or documentation
  - Recompilation with tools (e.g: make, ANT, ...) and documentation provided
  Not evaluated
- Code extension
  - Any modification requires code recompilation
  - Architecture designed for static extension but requires recompilation
  - Principle of plugin, architecture designed for dynamic extension without recompilation
  Not evaluated
Strategy
- License
  - Permissiveness (only if user wants to become owner of code)
    Very strict license, like GPL
    Moderate permissive license located between both extremes (GPL and BSD) dual-licensing depending on the type of user (person, company, ...) or their activities
    Very permissive like BSD or Apache licenses
    Not evaluated
  - Protection against proprietary forks
    Very permissive like BSD or Apache licenses
    Moderate permissive license located between both extremes (GPL and BSD), dual-licensing depending on the type of user (person, company, ...) or their activies
    Very strict license, like GPL
    Not evaluated
- Copyright owners
  - Rights held by a few individuals or entities, making it easier to change the license
  - Rights held by numerous individuals owning the code in a homogeneous way, making relicense very difficult
  - Rights held by a legal entity in whom the community trusts (e.g: FSF or ASF)
  Not evaluated
- Modification of source code
  - No pratical way to propose code modification
  - Tools provided to access and modify code (like CVS or SVN) but not really used to develop the software
  - The code modification process is well defined, exposed and respected, based on roles assignment
  Not evaluated
- Roadmap
  - No published roadmap
  - Existing roadmap without planning
  - Versionned roadmap, with planning and measure of delays
  Not evaluated
- Sponsor
  - Software has no sponsor, the core team is not paid
  - Software has an unique sponsor who might determine its strategy
  - Software is sponsored by industry
  Not evaluated
- Strategical independence
  - No detectable strategy or strong dependency on one unique actor(person, company,sponsor)
  - Strategical vision shared with several other free and open source projects but without strong commitment from copyrights owners
  - Strong independence of the code team, legal entity holding rights, strong involvement in the standardization process
  Not evaluated

Generic Editing

Generic features of code editor

Drag and Drop
- No Drag and Drop
- Code can be dragged and dropped but with some limitation
- Code can be easily dragged and dropped
Score : 2/2
Expand/Collapse
- No expand/collapse feature
- Code blocks can be individually expanded/collapsed
- Code blocks can be expanded/collapsed, individually or as a group action
Score : 0/2
Line numbering
- No line numbering
- Line numbering is not optional
- Optional line numbering
Score : 2/2
Word wrap
- No word wrap
- Word wrap is not optional or not configurable
- Word wrap is optional and is configurable (column width)
Score : 0/2
Find/Replace
- No find/replace feature
- Basic find/replace features
- Advanced find/replace features like filtering based on coding language, styles, regex, ...
Score : 2/2
Undo/Redo
- No undo/redo features
- Limited number of undo/redo
- Unlimited undo/redo
Score : 2/2
Comments
- No feature available, comments must be entered by developer
- Existing commenting features
- Easy block commenting (keyboard shorthut and/or context menu), with ability to comment code in heterogeneous languages (CSS, HTML, JavaScript)
Score : 0/2
Code formatter/beautifier
- No feature available
- Existing features but limited to JavaScript only
- Features available for JavaScript and other languages such as HTML or CSS
Score : 1/2
Refactoring
- No refactoring
- Refactoring limited to few types of object
- Advanced refactoring features (like refactoring on multiple documents)
Score : 0/2

JavaScript Editing

JavaScript code editing features

Syntax highlighting
- No syntax highlighting for JavaScript
- Basic syntax highlighting for JavaScript (mainly keywords and built-in objects)
- Extended syntax highlighting for JavaScript (keywords, built-in, DOM and developer's objects)
Score : 2/2
Brace/bracket editing
- No automatic brace/bracket editing features
- Auto brace/bracket insertion OR brace/bracket pairs matching
- Auto brace/bracket insertion AND brace/bracket pairs matching
Score : 1/2
Autocompletion
- No autocompletion available
- Autocompletion for JavaScript keywords, native and DOM objects only
- Autocompletion for JavaScript keywords, native, DOM (0, 1 and 2) and developer's objects
Score : 1/2
Intellisense
- No Intellisense feature
- Intellisense for JavaScript keywords and native objects only
- Intellisense for JavaScript keywords, native objects and developer's objects
Score : 0/2
Error/Warning management
- No automatic error/warning detection
- Errors are detected but not warnings OR are not highlighted in code as long as listed in a separate panel
- Errors and warning are detected, highlighted in code and listed in a separate panel
Score : 0/2
Code generation
- No code generation
- Reusable code snippets/templates OR class skeletons
- Generation from an upper design view (using UML formalism for instance)
Score : 1/2
Pre-packaged JavaScript Libraries
- No external libraries available
- Few libraries available with no ability for developer to add new ones by himself
- Several external libraries are integrated with easy way to add more (via a plugin system for instance)
Score : 0/2

JavaScript code optimization

Available features to optimize JavaScript code (logging, debugging and profiling)

Logging
- No integrated logging features
- IDE offers limited logging functions
- IDE offers logging framework with centralized and filtered logs
Score : 0/2
Debugging
- Debugger
  - No debugger available for JavaScript
  - Debugger limited to Web browsers
  - Debugger usable for any JavaScript context (not only web)
  Score : 0/2
- State management
  - Only current state value can be watched
  - Evaluation of expressions entered by developer AND stack traces are also available
  - State values can by modified on the fly by developer
  Score : 0/2
- Breaking
  - No breaking features
  - Break on breakpoints manually defined by the developer
  - Conditional breaking: on error and advanced conditions (use of assertions) AND ability to exclude some code for breaking scope (functions or eval code)
  Score : 0/2
- Stepping
  - No step by step execution
  - Only next step can be executed
  - Stepping into, over and out of functions is also possible
  Score : 0/2
Profiling
- No profiler available
- Flat profiler shows out-of-context call times and download times (in a web context)
- Call-graph profiler shows call times and frequencies AND call-chains involved
Score : 0/2

Advanced features

Code navigation
- No code navigation feature
- Document outline provides list of functions and variables
- Source code contains hyperlinks to navigate to declarations of variables and functions (even between files)
Score : 0/2
Documentation generation
- No documentation generation
- Static code generation using JsDoc/ScriptDoc tags
- Dynamic documentation generated on the fly by the IDE, OR advanced and customizable reporting features
Score : 0/2
Code execution in IDE
- No code execution in IDE
- Basic testing code, like functions calls can be made in and from IDE
- A JavaScript shell is integrated in IDE to test code, OR specific code execution can be triggered in breaking context while debugging
Score : 0/2

Web Development

Web preview
- No preview in internal or external browser
- Basic preview with no inspection
- Preview with ability to inspect HTML tags, DOM elements and CSS declarations
Score : 1/2
HTML Editing
- Syntax highlighting
  - No syntax highlighting for X/HTML
  - Basic syntax highlighting for X/HTML, limited to tagnames for instance
  - Extended syntax highlighting for X/HTML including attributes AND JavaSCript code included in attributes values
  Score : 1/2
- Autocompletion
  - No autocompletion available
  - Autocompletion of HTML tags keywords and attributes
  - Autocompletion of HTML tags/attributes AND possibles children elements of current element
  Score : 1/2
- Error/Warning management
  - No automatic X/HTML error/warning detection
  - Only not well formed X/HTML is detected without warnings OR it is not highlighted in code as long as listed in a separate panel
  - HTML errors and warning are detected, highlighted in code and listed in a separate panel
  Score : 0/2
CSS Editing
- Syntax highlighting
  - No highlighting for CSS
  - Limited CSS highlighting
  - Complete highlighting of all versions of CSS standard, support of specific-browser CSS declarations
  Score : 1/2
- Autocompletion
  - No CSS autocompletion available
  - Limited CSS autocompletion
  - Complete CSS autocompletion for all versions of CSS standard and specific-browser declarations
  Score : 1/2
- Error/Warning management
  - No automatic CSS error/warning detection
  - Only CSS errors are detected
  - CSS errors and warnings (those regarding cascade inspection for instance)
  Score : 0/2

Help

Available help features

Reference guides
- No JavaScript language reference guide available
- Internal OR limited JavaScript reference guide (for instance with no object-oriented section)
- Complete and up-to-date (for instance via online sync) JavaSCript, X/HTML and CSS reference guides
Score : 0/2
Contextual Help
- No contextual Help
- Basic and limited contextual Help
- Contextual help available in editor or through a specific contextual Help panel, on JavaScript but also X/HTML and CSS
Score : 0/2
Tutorials
- No tutorial available
- Basic and simple tutorials integrated in IDE
- Many tutorials on JavaScript, X/HTML and CSS, with regular updates (through an online sync or connextion to wiki for instance)
Score : 0/2