A comparison of tree- and line-oriented observational slicing

Observation-based slicing and its generalization observational slicing are recently-introduced, language-independent dynamic slicing techniques. They both construct slices based on the dependencies observed during program execution, rather than static or dynamic dependence analysis. The original implementation of the observation-based slicing algorithm used lines of source code as its program representation. A recent variation, developed to slice modelling languages (such as Simulink), used an XML representation of an executable model. We ported the XML slicer to source code by constructing a tree representation of traditional source code through the use of srcML. This work compares the tree- and line-based slicers using four experiments involving twenty different programs, ranging from classic benchmarks to million-line production systems. The resulting slices are essentially the same size for the majority of the programs and are often identical. However, structural constraints imposed by the tree representation sometimes force the slicer to retain enclosing control structures. It can also “bog down” trying to delete single-token subtrees. This occasionally makes the tree-based slices larger and the tree-based slicer slower than a parallelised version of the line-based slicer. In addition, a Java versus C comparison finds that the two languages lead to similar slices, but Java code takes noticeably longer to slice. The initial experiments suggest two improvements to the tree-based slicer: the addition of a size threshold, for ignoring small subtrees, and subtree replacement. The former enables the slicer to run 3.4 times faster while producing slices that are only about 9% larger. At the same time the subtree replacement reduces size by about 8–12% and allows the tree-based slicer to produce more natural slices

Evaluating Lexical Approximation of Program Dependence

Complex dependence analysis typically provides an underpinning approximation of true program dependence. We investigate the effectiveness of using lexical information to approximate such dependence, introducing two new deletion operators to Observation-Based Slicing (ORBS). ORBS provides direct observation of program dependence, computing a slice using iterative, speculative deletion of program parts. Deletions become permanent if they do not affect the slicing criterion. The original ORBS uses a bounded deletion window operator that attempts to delete consecutive lines together. Our new deletion operators attempt to delete multiple, non-contiguous lines that are lexically similar to each other. We evaluate the lexical dependence approximation by exploring the trade-off between the precision and the speed of dependence analysis performed with new deletion operators. The deletion operators are evaluated independently, as well as collectively via a novel generalization of ORBS that exploits multiple deletion operators: Multi-operator Observation-Based Slicing (MOBS). An empirical evaluation using three Java projects, six C projects, and one multi-lingual project written in Python and C finds that the lexical information provides a useful approximation to the underlying dependence. On average, MOBS can delete 69% of lines deleted by the original ORBS, while taking only 36% of the wall clock time required by ORBS

The Stores Model of Code Cognition

Program comprehension is perhaps one of the oldest topics within the psychology of programming. It addresses a central issue: how programmers work with and manipulate source code to construct effective software systems. Models can play an important role in understanding the challenges developers and engineers contend with. This paper presents a model of program comprehension, or code cognition, which has been derived from literature found within the disciplines of computing and psychology. Drawing on direct experimentation, this paper argues that a model of code cognition should take account of the visual, spatial and linguistic abilities of developers. The strengths and weaknesses of this model are discussed and further research directions presented

A general algebra of business rules for heterogeneous systems

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Tree-oriented vs. line-oriented Observation-Based Slicing

Observation-based slicing is a recently-introduced, language-independent slicing technique based on the dependencies observable from program behavior. The original algorithm processed traditional source code at the line-of-text level. A recent variation was developed to slice the tree-based XML representation of executable models. We ported the model slicer to source code using srcML to construct a tree-based representation of traditional source code. We present the results of a comparison of the two slicers using four experiments involving seventeen different programs, including classic benchmarks and larger production systems. The resulting slices had essentially the same size and quite often the same content. Where they differ, the use of tree structure traded an ability to remove unnecessary parts of a statement for the requirement of maintaining aspect of the code structure. Comparing the slicers finds that each has its advantages. For example, when the tree representation facilitates the deletion of large chunks of code, the tree slicer was over eight times faster. In contrast, when slicing C++ code it was over nine times slower because of the multitude of small trees created to support C++ syntax. Given the pros and cons of the two, the results suggest the value of their hybrid combination

Towards a Generic Framework to Generate Explanatory Traces of Constraint Solving and Rule-Based Reasoning

In this report, we show how to use the Simple Fluent Calculus (SFC) to specify generic tracers, i.e. tracers which produce a generic trace. A generic trace is a trace which can be produced by different implementations of a software component and used independently from the traced component. This approach is used to define a method for extending a java based CHRor platform called CHROME (Constraint Handling Rule Online Model-driven Engine) with an extensible generic tracer. The method includes a tracer specification in SFC, a methodology to extend it, and the way to integrate it with CHROME, resulting in the platform CHROME-REF (for Reasoning Explanation Facilities), which is a constraint solving and rule based reasoning engine with explanatory traces

Evidence-driven testing and debugging of software systems

Program debugging is the process of testing, exposing, reproducing, diagnosing and fixing software bugs. Many techniques have been proposed to aid developers during software testing and debugging. However, researchers have found that developers hardly use or adopt the proposed techniques in software practice. Evidently, this is because there is a gap between proposed methods and the state of software practice. Most methods fail to address the actual needs of software developers. In this dissertation, we pose the following scientific question: How can we bridge the gap between software practice and the state-of-the-art automated testing and debugging techniques? To address this challenge, we put forward the following thesis: Software testing and debugging should be driven by empirical evidence collected from software practice. In particular, we posit that the feedback from software practice should shape and guide (the automation) of testing and debugging activities. In this thesis, we focus on gathering evidence from software practice by conducting several empirical studies on software testing and debugging activities in the real-world. We then build tools and methods that are well-grounded and driven by the empirical evidence obtained from these experiments. Firstly, we conduct an empirical study on the state of debugging in practice using a survey and a human study. In this study, we ask developers about their debugging needs and observe the tools and strategies employed by developers while testing, diagnosing and repairing real bugs. Secondly, we evaluate the effectiveness of the state-of-the-art automated fault localization (AFL) methods on real bugs and programs. Thirdly, we conducted an experiment to evaluate the causes of invalid inputs in software practice. Lastly, we study how to learn input distributions from real-world sample inputs, using probabilistic grammars. To bridge the gap between software practice and the state of the art in software testing and debugging, we proffer the following empirical results and techniques: (1) We collect evidence on the state of practice in program debugging and indeed, we found that there is a chasm between (available) debugging tools and developer needs. We elicit the actual needs and concerns of developers when testing and diagnosing real faults and provide a benchmark (called DBGBench) to aid the automated evaluation of debugging and repair tools. (2) We provide empirical evidence on the effectiveness of several state-of-the-art AFL techniques (such as statistical debugging formulas and dynamic slicing). Building on the obtained empirical evidence, we provide a hybrid approach that outperforms the state-of-the-art AFL techniques. (3) We evaluate the prevalence and causes of invalid inputs in software practice, and we build on the lessons learned from this experiment to build a general-purpose algorithm (called ddmax) that automatically diagnoses and repairs real-world invalid inputs. (4) We provide a method to learn the distribution of input elements in software practice using probabilistic grammars and we further employ the learned distribution to drive the test generation of inputs that are similar (or dissimilar) to sample inputs found in the wild. In summary, we propose an evidence-driven approach to software testing and debugging, which is based on collecting empirical evidence from software practice to guide and direct software testing and debugging. In our evaluation, we found that our approach is effective in improving the effectiveness of several debugging activities in practice. In particular, using our evidence-driven approach, we elicit the actual debugging needs of developers, improve the effectiveness of several automated fault localization techniques, effectively debug and repair invalid inputs, and generate test inputs that are (dis)similar to real-world inputs. Our proposed methods are built on empirical evidence and they improve over the state-of-the-art techniques in testing and debugging.Software-Debugging bezeichnet das Testen, Aufspüren, Reproduzieren, Diagnostizieren und das Beheben von Fehlern in Programmen. Es wurden bereits viele Debugging-Techniken vorgestellt, die Softwareentwicklern beim Testen und Debuggen unterstützen. Dennoch hat sich in der Forschung gezeigt, dass Entwickler diese Techniken in der Praxis kaum anwenden oder adaptieren. Das könnte daran liegen, dass es einen großen Abstand zwischen den vorgestellten und in der Praxis tatsächlich genutzten Techniken gibt. Die meisten Techniken genügen den Anforderungen der Entwickler nicht. In dieser Dissertation stellen wir die folgende wissenschaftliche Frage: Wie können wir die Kluft zwischen Software-Praxis und den aktuellen wissenschaftlichen Techniken für automatisiertes Testen und Debugging schließen? Um diese Herausforderung anzugehen, stellen wir die folgende These auf: Das Testen und Debuggen von Software sollte von empirischen Daten, die in der Software-Praxis gesammelt wurden, vorangetrieben werden. Genauer gesagt postulieren wir, dass das Feedback aus der Software-Praxis die Automation des Testens und Debuggens formen und bestimmen sollte. In dieser Arbeit fokussieren wir uns auf das Sammeln von Daten aus der Software-Praxis, indem wir einige empirische Studien über das Testen und Debuggen von Software in der echten Welt durchführen. Auf Basis der gesammelten Daten entwickeln wir dann Werkzeuge, die sich auf die Daten der durchgeführten Experimente stützen. Als erstes führen wir eine empirische Studie über den Stand des Debuggens in der Praxis durch, wobei wir eine Umfrage und eine Humanstudie nutzen. In dieser Studie befragen wir Entwickler zu ihren Bedürfnissen, die sie beim Debuggen haben und beobachten die Werkzeuge und Strategien, die sie beim Diagnostizieren, Testen und Aufspüren echter Fehler einsetzen. Als nächstes bewerten wir die Effektivität der aktuellen Automated Fault Localization (AFL)- Methoden zum automatischen Aufspüren von echten Fehlern in echten Programmen. Unser dritter Schritt ist ein Experiment, um die Ursachen von defekten Eingaben in der Software-Praxis zu ermitteln. Zuletzt erforschen wir, wie Häufigkeitsverteilungen von Teileingaben mithilfe einer Grammatik von echten Beispiel-Eingaben aus der Praxis gelernt werden können. Um die Lücke zwischen Software-Praxis und der aktuellen Forschung über Testen und Debuggen von Software zu schließen, bieten wir die folgenden empirischen Ergebnisse und Techniken: (1) Wir sammeln aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse zum Stand des Software-Debuggens und finden in der Tat eine Diskrepanz zwischen (vorhandenen) Debugging-Werkzeugen und dem, was der Entwickler tatsächlich benötigt. Wir sammeln die tatsächlichen Bedürfnisse von Entwicklern beim Testen und Debuggen von Fehlern aus der echten Welt und entwickeln einen Benchmark (DbgBench), um das automatische Evaluieren von Debugging-Werkzeugen zu erleichtern. (2) Wir stellen empirische Daten zur Effektivität einiger aktueller AFL-Techniken vor (z.B. Statistical Debugging-Formeln und Dynamic Slicing). Auf diese Daten aufbauend, stellen wir einen hybriden Algorithmus vor, der die Leistung der aktuellen AFL-Techniken übertrifft. (3) Wir evaluieren die Häufigkeit und Ursachen von ungültigen Eingaben in der Softwarepraxis und stellen einen auf diesen Daten aufbauenden universell einsetzbaren Algorithmus (ddmax) vor, der automatisch defekte Eingaben diagnostiziert und behebt. (4) Wir stellen eine Methode vor, die Verteilung von Schnipseln von Eingaben in der Software-Praxis zu lernen, indem wir Grammatiken mit Wahrscheinlichkeiten nutzen. Die gelernten Verteilungen benutzen wir dann, um den Beispiel-Eingaben ähnliche (oder verschiedene) Eingaben zu erzeugen. Zusammenfassend stellen wir einen auf der Praxis beruhenden Ansatz zum Testen und Debuggen von Software vor, welcher auf empirischen Daten aus der Software-Praxis basiert, um das Testen und Debuggen zu unterstützen. In unserer Evaluierung haben wir festgestellt, dass unser Ansatz effektiv viele Debugging-Disziplinen in der Praxis verbessert. Genauer gesagt finden wir mit unserem Ansatz die genauen Bedürfnisse von Entwicklern, verbessern die Effektivität vieler AFL-Techniken, debuggen und beheben effektiv fehlerhafte Eingaben und generieren Test-Eingaben, die (un)ähnlich zu Eingaben aus der echten Welt sind. Unsere vorgestellten Methoden basieren auf empirischen Daten und verbessern die aktuellen Techniken des Testens und Debuggens

Customizable Visual Traces for Program Explanations

Correctness and efficiency are important properties of programs. However, to support maintenance and debugging, the programs should also be understandable. Program explanations also play a vital role in educational settings, enhancing the understanding of programs among students. Proof trees provide a sound basis for generating dynamic explanations of programs. But these proof trees can grow huge very quickly, even for simple programs. In this thesis, I present (1) a new notation for traces that aims towards their succinct representation, (2) a new variant of the Call-By-Value semantics to generate small traces, and (3) a query language that can be used to adapt traces to individual needs. I will also present an evaluation of our approach on 21 well-known examples that shows reduction in the overall size of traces by at least 79% using the transformations provided by the query language