What I like most is that it's easy to use, the set-up wasn't too complex. It's intuitive and it has a lot of features. We use it both to identify vulnerabilities and for code quality, it's impressive for how many things it can scan the code for. For example, it found outdated packages with vulnerabilities and configurations with potential security risks. It also provides links with more information for each finding and ways to fix them.

There were a few cases where for some vulnerabilities it found a few places where they occurred, but didn't find all the places, so you have to be careful and check all the code.

Although getting pseude code for all low code diagrams from our Mendix app made me a bit skeptical in the beginning, I started to appreciate the overall features Sigrid provides and the ability to review both Open Source and Mendix low code apps. As I outlined in the cons, there should be more credit/focus in Mendix Low Code developed apps when as little Java as possible is used, benefitting fully from Low Code assesments. I personally don't appreciate when Java is seen as the way to go in Low Code software development.

We use Sigrid for the following objectives (in order of top prio first): - Monitor and avoid vulnerabilities in libraries we use - Assess and improve code & low code quality - Assess Software Architectures and avoid/minimize module entanglements - Benchmark our Open Source and Low Code developments - Focus on good enough development and not over engineer

- In the Architecture Overview of your App, the Scores for Technology Stack give you 2.8 stars for all developments you do in Mendix Low Code (and we use Mendix QSM, the Mendix version of Sigrid) and 5.4 stars for any Java code you use in your Mendix app, this is crazy and should be solved. In a Mendix app you should expect the opposite, 2.8 stars if you use Java instead of the Low code way of developing. If this can be improved, Sigrid is a great tool.

Some quality aspects are monitorable, even though not all the essential ones

Customizability of what is measured and how this works with architecture goals is very low. Immediate feedback for developers missing

We have been using it for months now without any issue, we'll continue to use it and maybe reach out to improve and add new features.

It help us to evaluate and measure the entire scope of things when developing and maintaining or software and platforms. That's very helpful

It can be a bit overwhelming at first, but once you get to know it, you have an amazing tool

Sigrid can help you improve the quality of your code. Beyond duplication, size and complexity issues that a developer can easily locate by himself, also issues concering the coupling and dependencies issues

There are issues concerning the specificity of each programming language or framework, i.e. sigrid appears duplication issues in HTML which a developer cannot avoid