Are Smell-Based Metrics Actually Useful in Effort-Aware Structural Change-Proneness Prediction? An Empirical Study

Bad code smells (also named as code smells) are symptoms of poor design choices in implementation. Existing studies empirically confirmed that the presence of code smells increases the likelihood of subsequent changes (i.e., change-proness). However, to the best of our knowledge, no prior studies have leveraged smell-based metrics to predict particular change type (i.e., structural changes). Moreover, when evaluating the effectiveness of smell-based metrics in structural change-proneness prediction, none of existing studies take into account of the effort inspecting those change-prone source code. In this paper, we consider five smell-based metrics for effort-aware structural change-proneness prediction and compare these metrics with a baseline of well-known CK metrics in predicting particular categories of change types. Specifically, we first employ univariate logistic regression to analyze the correlation between each smellbased metric and structural change-proneness. Then, we build multivariate prediction models to examine the effectiveness of smell-based metrics in effort-aware structural change-proneness prediction when used alone and used together with the baseline metrics, respectively. Our experiments are conducted on six Java open-source projects with up to 60 versions and results indicate that: (1) all smell-based metrics are significantly related to structural change-proneness, except metric ANS in hive and SCM in camel after removing confounding effect of file size; (2) in most cases, smell-based metrics outperform the baseline metrics in predicting structural change-proneness; and (3) when used together with the baseline metrics, the smell-based metrics are more effective to predict change-prone files with being aware of inspection effort

RePOR: Mimicking humans on refactoring tasks. Are we there yet?

Refactoring is a maintenance activity that aims to improve design quality while preserving the behavior of a system. Several (semi)automated approaches have been proposed to support developers in this maintenance activity, based on the correction of anti-patterns, which are `poor' solutions to recurring design problems. However, little quantitative evidence exists about the impact of automatically refactored code on program comprehension, and in which context automated refactoring can be as effective as manual refactoring. Leveraging RePOR, an automated refactoring approach based on partial order reduction techniques, we performed an empirical study to investigate whether automated refactoring code structure affects the understandability of systems during comprehension tasks. (1) We surveyed 80 developers, asking them to identify from a set of 20 refactoring changes if they were generated by developers or by a tool, and to rate the refactoring changes according to their design quality; (2) we asked 30 developers to complete code comprehension tasks on 10 systems that were refactored by either a freelancer or an automated refactoring tool. To make comparison fair, for a subset of refactoring actions that introduce new code entities, only synthetic identifiers were presented to practitioners. We measured developers' performance using the NASA task load index for their effort, the time that they spent performing the tasks, and their percentages of correct answers. Our findings, despite current technology limitations, show that it is reasonable to expect a refactoring tools to match developer code

John Templeton Foundation: Capabilities Report

This annual report, celebrating the 25th anniversary of the foundation, includes letters from its leaders, a history of the foundation, details of current grantmaking and other activities, financial statements, and lists of trustees

A systematic literature review on the code smells datasets and validation mechanisms

The accuracy reported for code smell-detecting tools varies depending on the dataset used to evaluate the tools. Our survey of 45 existing datasets reveals that the adequacy of a dataset for detecting smells highly depends on relevant properties such as the size, severity level, project types, number of each type of smell, number of smells, and the ratio of smelly to non-smelly samples in the dataset. Most existing datasets support God Class, Long Method, and Feature Envy while six smells in Fowler and Beck's catalog are not supported by any datasets. We conclude that existing datasets suffer from imbalanced samples, lack of supporting severity level, and restriction to Java language.Comment: 34 pages, 10 figures, 12 tables, Accepte