480 research outputs found

    RefDiff: Detecting Refactorings in Version Histories

    Full text link
    Refactoring is a well-known technique that is widely adopted by software engineers to improve the design and enable the evolution of a system. Knowing which refactoring operations were applied in a code change is a valuable information to understand software evolution, adapt software components, merge code changes, and other applications. In this paper, we present RefDiff, an automated approach that identifies refactorings performed between two code revisions in a git repository. RefDiff employs a combination of heuristics based on static analysis and code similarity to detect 13 well-known refactoring types. In an evaluation using an oracle of 448 known refactoring operations, distributed across seven Java projects, our approach achieved precision of 100% and recall of 88%. Moreover, our evaluation suggests that RefDiff has superior precision and recall than existing state-of-the-art approaches.Comment: Paper accepted at 14th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR), pages 1-11, 201

    Property-Based Testing - The ProTest Project

    Get PDF
    The ProTest project is an FP7 STREP on property based testing. The purpose of the project is to develop software engineering approaches to improve reliability of service-oriented networks; support fault-finding and diagnosis based on specified properties of the system. And to do so we will build automated tools that will generate and run tests, monitor execution at run-time, and log events for analysis. The Erlang / Open Telecom Platform has been chosen as our initial implementation vehicle due to its robustness and reliability within the telecoms sector. It is noted for its success in the ATM telecoms switches by Ericsson, one of the project partners, as well as for multiple other uses such as in facebook, yahoo etc. In this paper we provide an overview of the project goals, as well as detailing initial progress in developing property based testing techniques and tools for the concurrent functional programming language Erlang

    Generic Model Refactorings

    Get PDF
    Many modeling languages share some common concepts and principles. For example, Java, MOF, and UML share some aspects of the concepts\ud of classes, methods, attributes, and inheritance. However, model\ud transformations such as refactorings specified for a given language\ud cannot be readily reused for another language because their related\ud metamodels may be structurally different. Our aim is to enable a\ud flexible reuse of model transformations across various metamodels.\ud Thus, in this paper, we present an approach allowing the specification\ud of generic model transformations, in particular refactorings, so\ud that they can be applied to different metamodels. Our approach relies\ud on two mechanisms: (1) an adaptation based mainly on the weaving\ud of aspects; (2) the notion of model typing, an extension of object\ud typing in the model-oriented context. We validated our approach by\ud performing some experiments that consisted of specifying three well\ud known refactorings (Encapsulate Field, Move Method, and Pull Up Method)\ud and applying each of them onto three different metamodels (Java,\ud MOF, and UML)

    Evaluation of Kermeta for Solving Graph-based Problems

    Get PDF
    Kermeta is a meta-language for specifying the structure and behavior of graphs of interconnected objects called models. In this paper,\ud we show that Kermeta is relatively suitable for solving three graph-based\ud problems. First, Kermeta allows the specification of generic model\ud transformations such as refactorings that we apply to different metamodels\ud including Ecore, Java, and Uml. Second, we demonstrate the extensibility\ud of Kermeta to the formal language Alloy using an inter-language model\ud transformation. Kermeta uses Alloy to generate recommendations for\ud completing partially specified models. Third, we show that the Kermeta\ud compiler achieves better execution time and memory performance compared\ud to similar graph-based approaches using a common case study. The\ud three solutions proposed for those graph-based problems and their\ud evaluation with Kermeta according to the criteria of genericity,\ud extensibility, and performance are the main contribution of the paper.\ud Another contribution is the comparison of these solutions with those\ud proposed by other graph-based tools

    A heuristic-based approach to code-smell detection

    Get PDF
    Encapsulation and data hiding are central tenets of the object oriented paradigm. Deciding what data and behaviour to form into a class and where to draw the line between its public and private details can make the difference between a class that is an understandable, flexible and reusable abstraction and one which is not. This decision is a difficult one and may easily result in poor encapsulation which can then have serious implications for a number of system qualities. It is often hard to identify such encapsulation problems within large software systems until they cause a maintenance problem (which is usually too late) and attempting to perform such analysis manually can also be tedious and error prone. Two of the common encapsulation problems that can arise as a consequence of this decomposition process are data classes and god classes. Typically, these two problems occur together – data classes are lacking in functionality that has typically been sucked into an over-complicated and domineering god class. This paper describes the architecture of a tool which automatically detects data and god classes that has been developed as a plug-in for the Eclipse IDE. The technique has been evaluated in a controlled study on two large open source systems which compare the tool results to similar work by Marinescu, who employs a metrics-based approach to detecting such features. The study provides some valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the two approache

    ADsafety: Type-Based Verification of JavaScript Sandboxing

    Full text link
    Web sites routinely incorporate JavaScript programs from several sources into a single page. These sources must be protected from one another, which requires robust sandboxing. The many entry-points of sandboxes and the subtleties of JavaScript demand robust verification of the actual sandbox source. We use a novel type system for JavaScript to encode and verify sandboxing properties. The resulting verifier is lightweight and efficient, and operates on actual source. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our technique by applying it to ADsafe, which revealed several bugs and other weaknesses.Comment: in Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium (2011

    How We Refactor and How We Mine it ? A Large Scale Study on Refactoring Activities in Open Source Systems

    Get PDF
    Refactoring, as coined by William Obdyke in 1992, is the art of optimizing the syntactic design of a software system without altering its external behavior. Refactoring was also cataloged by Martin Fowler as a response to the existence of design defects that negatively impact the software\u27s design. Since then, the research in refactoring has been driven by improving systems structures. However, recent studies have been showing that developers may incorporate refactoring strategies in other development related activities that go beyond improving the design. In this context, we aim in better understanding the developer\u27s perception of refactoring by mining and automatically classifying refactoring activities in 1,706 open source Java projects. We perform a \textit{differentiated replication} of the pioneering work by Tsantalis et al. We revisit five research questions presented in this previous empirical study and compare our results to their original work. The original study investigates various types of refactorings applied to different source types (i.e., production vs. test), the degree to which experienced developers contribute to refactoring efforts, the chronological collocation of refactoring with the release and testing periods, and the developer\u27s intention behind specific types of refactorings. We reexamine the same questions but on a larger number of systems. To do this, our approach relies on mining refactoring instances executed throughout several releases of each project we studied. We also mined several properties related to these projects; namely their commits, contributors, issues, test files, etc. Our findings confirm some of the results of the previous study and we highlight some differences for discussion. We found that 1) feature addition and bug fixes are strong motivators for developers to refactor their code base, rather than the traditional design improvement motivation; 2) a variety of refactoring types are applied when refactoring both production and test code. 3) refactorings tend to be applied by experienced developers who have contributed a wide range of commits to the code. 4) there is a correlation between the type of refactoring activities taking place and whether the source code is undergoing a release or a test period
    • …
    corecore