軟體複雜度測量是軟體工程領域中的一個十分重要部分。測量方法大致上可分為宏觀測量與微觀測量。前者測量系統法雜度而後者針對程式複雜度。雖然已有許多有名的測量方法，但為提升測量準確性，新的測量方法不斷被發表。但是許多導致測量不準確的因素是來至測量目標。針對微觀測量方法與結構化程式，我們藉由對C語言的研究找出語法中可能導致測量不準確的因素。並且藉由程式的正規劃來改善測量的準確性。

Software complexity measurement is an essential part in the domain of software engineering. In measurement metrics developing, metrics was classed as two kinds, macro and micro. Macro complexity metrics consider the difficulty of system. Micro metrics are based on program code measuring. In order to enhance the measuring precision, people invent new metrics to replace famous metrics. But, many factors which cause imprecise measuring exist in measuring target.
With normalization, the purpose of this paper is to improve the outcome consistency of computations of different metric complexities. Furthermore, the advantage of the paper is that normalized programs could derive complexity value of Halstead and Cyclomatic from a complexity value of LOC. We focus on micro measuring and structure program. We find out the imprecision factors which hide in syntax via studying C language. And, we use program normalization to improve accuracy of measuring.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…..………..………………..……………………………………..i
ENGLISH ABSTRACT……….……………….…………………...…………………………ii
CHINESE ABSTRACT…….………….............…………………………………………..…iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS….……………......…….…………..………..................…………..iv
CHAPTER
1 Introduction.………………………………………………...………….………….1
1.1 Software Complexity and Metrics ……………………...……………………1
1.2Motivatio..………………………………………..……….…………………..2
2 Complexity Measurement ………………………………………..………………..3
2.1 Overview …………………………………………..………………………...4
2.2 Existing Complexity Measurement and Issue …………..…………………...4
2.2.1 Cyclomatic Complexity Measurement …………..……………...4
2.2.2 Halstead Complexity Measurement ………………..……………6
2.2.3 Lines of Code Measurement………………………………….....6
3 Preprocess: Program Normalization ……………………………………..………..8
3.1 Overview ………………………..…………………………………………...8
3.2 Program Normalization Rules ………………………...……………………10
3.3 Program Normalization Step …………………………………..…………...21
4 Case Study …………………………………………...……………………….......22
4.1 Example of Program Normalization ……………..………………………...22
4.2 Experimental Data …………………………………..………………..……27
5 Conclusion ……………………………………………………..………………...31
5.1 Summary …………………………………………..…………………….....31
5.2 Contribution……………………………………………………..…………32
5.3 Future Work………………………………………………………………..33
REFERENCES…........…………………….…………......……….................……...……….35

[1] Z. Ammarguellat, “A Control-Flow Normalization Algorithm and Its Complexity,” Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, Vol. 18, Issue 3, pp. 237-251, March 1992.
[2] T. Ball, J. R. Larus, “Using paths to measure, explain and enhance program behavior,” IEEE, Computer, Vol. 33, Issue 7, pp. 57-65, July 2000.
[3] N.S. Gill, P.S. Grover, D.R. Taneja, “System complexity as an aid to quality assurance”, Software Testing, Reliability and Quality Assurance, 1994. Conference Proceedings, First International Conference on, pp.116-120, Dec 21-22. 1994.
[4] M. H. Halstead, “Elements of Software Science, Operating, and Programming Systems Series”, New York, NY: Elsevier, 1977.
[5] Ying-Yen Hsu, “A Quantitative Software Complexity Measurement by Program Normalization,” 2003 International Conference on Informatics, Cybernetics, and Systems, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, ROC, pp.981-986, December 14-16, 2003,
[6] Ling-Hsuan Huang, “Applying Computing Theory on Program Normalization for Quantitative Complexity Measurement,” 2001.
[7] IEEE Software Engineering Standards, Std. 610.12-1990.
[8] K.B. Lakshmanan, S. Jayaprakash, and P.K. Sinha, “Properties of Control-Flow Complexity Measures,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol.17, No.12, pp.1289-1296, Dec. 1991.
[9] Langsam, M.J. Augenstein, A.M. Tenenbaum, “Data Structures Using C And C++,” Prentice Hall, 1996.
[10] K. S. Lew, T. S. Dillon, K. E. Forward, “Software complexity and its impact on software reliability”, Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, Vol. 14, Issue.11, pp.1645-1655, Nov. 1988.
[11] T. J. McCabe, “A Complexity Measure”, IEEE Tran. Software Eng., Vol. SE-2, No. 4, Dec. 1976.
[12] T. J. McCabe, “Cyclomatic complexity and the year 2000," Software, IEEE, Vol. 13, Issue. 3, pp. 115-117, May 1996.
[13] R. S. Pressman, “Software Engineering: A Practitioner's Approach” McGraw-Hill, New York, 1997.
[14] Y. Wang; J. Shao, “Measurement of the cognitive functional complexity of software”, 2003, Proceedings, The Second IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics, pp. 67 -74, Aug. 18-20, 2003.
[15] Pu-Lin Yeh, Jin-Cherng Lin, “Software Testability Metrics Based on Dominant Elements in Program Structure”, Proceeding of the Ninth Workshop on Object-Oriented Technologies and Applications, Cau-Shyong, Taiwan, pp. 71-175, Sep.18, 1998.
[16] Linux source code, the version 2.6.10.
[17] Peter Kokol, Janez Brest, “Software Complexity with the Critical Value”, IEEE 1997.
[18] Jingqiu Shau, Yangxu Wang, “A New Measure of Software Complexity based on Cognitive Weights”, IEEE CCECE 2003.
[19] Jingqiu Shau, Yangxu Wang, “Measurement of the Cognitive Functional Complexity of Software”, ICCI 2003.
[20] Claes Wohlin, “Revisiting Measurement of Software Complexity”, IEEE 1996.