7 research outputs found

    Automatic Detection of GUI Design Smells: The Case of Blob Listener

    Get PDF
    International audienceGraphical User Interfaces (GUIs) intensively rely on event-driven programming: widgets send GUI events, which capture users' interactions, to dedicated objects called controllers. Controllers implement several GUI listeners that handle these events to produce GUI commands. In this work, we conducted an empirical study on 13 large Java Swing open-source software systems. We study to what extent the number of GUI commands that a GUI listener can produce has an impact on the change-and fault-proneness of the GUI listener code. We identify a new type of design smell, called Blob listener that characterizes GUI listeners that can produce more than two GUI commands. We show that 21 % of the analyzed GUI controllers are Blob listeners. We propose a systematic static code analysis procedure that searches for Blob listener that we implement in InspectorGuidget. We conducted experiments on six software systems for which we manually identified 37 instances of Blob listener. InspectorGuidget successfully detected 36 Blob listeners out of 37. The results exhibit a precision of 97.37 % and a recall of 97.59 %. Finally, we propose coding practices to avoid the use of Blob listeners

    Safe Stream-Based Programming with Refinement Types

    Full text link
    In stream-based programming, data sources are abstracted as a stream of values that can be manipulated via callback functions. Stream-based programming is exploding in popularity, as it provides a powerful and expressive paradigm for handling asynchronous data sources in interactive software. However, high-level stream abstractions can also make it difficult for developers to reason about control- and data-flow relationships in their programs. This is particularly impactful when asynchronous stream-based code interacts with thread-limited features such as UI frameworks that restrict UI access to a single thread, since the threading behavior of streaming constructs is often non-intuitive and insufficiently documented. In this paper, we present a type-based approach that can statically prove the thread-safety of UI accesses in stream-based software. Our key insight is that the fluent APIs of stream-processing frameworks enable the tracking of threads via type-refinement, making it possible to reason automatically about what thread a piece of code runs on -- a difficult problem in general. We implement the system as an annotation-based Java typechecker for Android programs built upon the popular ReactiveX framework and evaluate its efficacy by annotating and analyzing 8 open-source apps, where we find 33 instances of unsafe UI access while incurring an annotation burden of only one annotation per 186 source lines of code. We also report on our experience applying the typechecker to two much larger apps from the Uber Technologies Inc. codebase, where it currently runs on every code change and blocks changes that introduce potential threading bugs

    Efficiently Manifesting Asynchronous Programming Errors in Android Apps

    Full text link
    Android, the #1 mobile app framework, enforces the single-GUI-thread model, in which a single UI thread manages GUI rendering and event dispatching. Due to this model, it is vital to avoid blocking the UI thread for responsiveness. One common practice is to offload long-running tasks into async threads. To achieve this, Android provides various async programming constructs, and leaves developers themselves to obey the rules implied by the model. However, as our study reveals, more than 25% apps violate these rules and introduce hard-to-detect, fail-stop errors, which we term as aysnc programming errors (APEs). To this end, this paper introduces APEChecker, a technique to automatically and efficiently manifest APEs. The key idea is to characterize APEs as specific fault patterns, and synergistically combine static analysis and dynamic UI exploration to detect and verify such errors. Among the 40 real-world Android apps, APEChecker unveils and processes 61 APEs, of which 51 are confirmed (83.6% hit rate). Specifically, APEChecker detects 3X more APEs than the state-of-art testing tools (Monkey, Sapienz and Stoat), and reduces testing time from half an hour to a few minutes. On a specific type of APEs, APEChecker confirms 5X more errors than the data race detection tool, EventRacer, with very few false alarms

    Evaluating Software Testing Techniques: A Systematic Mapping Study

    Get PDF
    Software testing techniques are crucial for detecting faults in software and reducing the risk of using it. As such, it is important that we have a good understanding of how to evaluate these techniques for their efficiency, scalability, applicability, and effectiveness at finding faults. This thesis enhances our understanding of testing technique evaluations by providing an overview of the state of the art in research. To accomplish this we utilize a systematic mapping study; structuring the field and identifying research gaps and publication trends. We then present a small case study demonstrating how our mapping study can be used to assist researchers in evaluating their own software testing techniques. We find that a majority of evaluations are empirical evaluations in the form of case studies and experiments, most of these evaluations are of low quality based on proper methodology guidelines, and that relatively few papers in the field discuss how testing techniques should be evaluated

    Automated refactoring for Java concurrency

    Get PDF
    In multicore era, programmers exploit concurrent programming to gain performance and responsiveness benefits. However, concurrent programs are difficult to write: the programmer has to balance two conflicting forces, thread safety and performance. To make concurrent programming easier, modern programming languages provide many kinds of concurrent constructs, such as threads, asynchronous tasks, concurrent collections, etc. However, despite the existence of these concurrent constructs, we know little about how developers use them. On the other hand, although existing API documentation teach developers how to use concurrent constructs, developers can still misuse and underuse them. In this dissertation, we study the use, misuse, and underuse of two types of commonly used Java concurrent constructs: Java concurrent collections and Android async constructs. Our studies show that even though concurrent constructs are widely used in practice, developers still misuse and underuse them, causing semantic and performance bugs. We propose and develop a refactoring toolset to help developers correctly use concurrent constructs. The toolset is composed of three automated refactorings: (i) detecting and fixing the misuses of Java concurrent collections, (ii) retro fitting concurrency for existing sequential Android code via a basic Android async construct, and (iii) converting inappropriately used basic Android async constructs to appropriately enhanced constructs for Android apps. Refactorings (i) and (iii) aim to fix misused constructs while refactoring (ii) aims to eliminate underuses. First, we cataloged nine commonly misused check-then-act idioms of Java concurrent collections, and show the correct usage of each idiom. We implemented the detection strategies in a tool, CTADetector, that finds and fi xes misused check-then-act idioms. We applied CTADetector to 28 widely used open source Java projects (comprising 6.4 million lines of code) that use Java concurrent collections. CTADetector discovered and fixed 60 bugs. These bugs were con firmed by developers and the fixes were accepted. Second, we conducted a formative study on how a basic Android async construct, AsyncTask, is used, misused, and underused in Android apps. Based on the study, we designed, developed, and evaluated Asynchronizer, an automated refactoring tool that enables developers to retrofit concurrency into Android apps. The refactoring uses a points-to static analysis to determine the safety of the refactoring. We applied Asynchronizer to perform 123 refactorings in 19 widely used Android apps; their developers accepted 40 refactorings in 7 projects. Third, we conducted a formative study on a corpus of 611 widely-used Android apps to map the asynchronous landscape of Android apps, understand how developers retrofi t concurrency in Android apps, and learn about barriers encountered by developers. Based on this study, we designed, implemented, and evaluated AsyncDroid, a refactoring tool which enables Android developers to transform existing improperly-used async constructs into correct constructs. We submitted 45 refactoring patches generated by AsyncDroid in 7 widely used Android projects, and developers accepted 15 of them. Finally, we released all tools as open-source plugins for the widely used Eclipse IDE which has millions of Java users. Moreover, we also integrated CTADetector and AsyncDroid with a static analysis platform, ShipShape, that is developed by Google. Google envisions ShipShape to become a widely-used platform. Any app developer that wants to check code quality, for example before submitting an app to the app store, would run ShipShape on her code base. We expect that by contributing new async analyzers to ShipShape, millions of app developers would bene t by being able to execute our analysis and transformations on their code
    corecore