Towards sound refactoring in erlang

Erlang is an actor-based programming language used extensively for building concurrent, reactive systems that are highly available and suff er minimum downtime. Such systems are often mission critical, making system correctness vital. Refactoring is code restructuring that improves the code but does not change behaviour. While using automated refactoring tools is less error-prone than performing refactorings manually, automated refactoring tools still cannot guarantee that the refactoring is correct, i.e., program behaviour is preserved. This leads to lack of trust in automated refactoring tools. We rst survey solutions to this problem proposed in the literature. Erlang refactoring tools as commonly use approximation techniques which do not guarantee behaviour while some other works propose the use of formal methodologies. In this work we aim to develop a formal methodology for refactoring Erlang code. We study behavioural preorders, with a special focus on the testing preorder as it seems most suited to our purpose.peer-reviewe

Renaming Global Variables in C Mechanically Proved Correct

Most integrated development environments are shipped with refactoring tools. However, their refactoring operations are often known to be unreliable. As a consequence, developers have to test their code after applying an automatic refactoring. In this article, we consider a refactoring operation (renaming of global variables in C), and we prove that its core implementation preserves the set of possible behaviors of transformed programs. That proof of correctness relies on the operational semantics of C provided by CompCert C in Coq.Comment: In Proceedings VPT 2016, arXiv:1607.0183

Trustworthy Refactoring via Decomposition and Schemes: A Complex Case Study

Widely used complex code refactoring tools lack a solid reasoning about the correctness of the transformations they implement, whilst interest in proven correct refactoring is ever increasing as only formal verification can provide true confidence in applying tool-automated refactoring to industrial-scale code. By using our strategic rewriting based refactoring specification language, we present the decomposition of a complex transformation into smaller steps that can be expressed as instances of refactoring schemes, then we demonstrate the semi-automatic formal verification of the components based on a theoretical understanding of the semantics of the programming language. The extensible and verifiable refactoring definitions can be executed in our interpreter built on top of a static analyser framework.Comment: In Proceedings VPT 2017, arXiv:1708.0688

Better Refactoring Tools for a Better Refactoring Strategy

Refactoring tools can improve the speed and accuracy with which we create and maintain software – but only if they are used. In practice, tools are not used as much as they could be; this seems to be because they do not align with the refactoring strategy preferred by the majority of programmers: floss refactoring. We propose five principles that characterize successful floss refactoring tools – principles that can help programmers to choose the most appropriate refactoring tools and also help toolsmiths to design more usable tools

Refactoring Tools: Fitness for Purpose

Refactoring tools can improve the speed and accuracy with which we create and maintain software -- but only if they are used. In practice, tools are not used as much as they could be: this seems to be because sometimes they do not align with the refactoring tactic preferred by the majority of programmers, a tactic we call floss refactoring. We propose five principles that characterize successful floss refactoring tools -- principles that can help programmers to choose the most appropriate refactoring tools and also help toolsmiths to design tools that fit the programmer\u27s purpose

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

A study of refactorings during software change tasks

Developers frequently undertake software change tasks that could be partially or fully automated by refactoring tools. As has been reported by others, all too often, these refactoring steps are instead performed manually by developers. These missed opportunities are referred to as occasions of disuse of refactoring tools. We perform an observational study in which 17 developers with professional experience attempt to solve three change tasks with steps amenable to the use of refactoring tools. We found that the strategies developers use to approach these tasks shape their workflow, which, in turn, shape the opportunities for refactoring tool use. We report on a number of findings about developer strategies, demonstrating the difficulty of aligning the kind of refactoring steps that emerge during a change task based on the strategy with the tools available. We also report on findings about refactoring tools, such as the difficulties developers face in controlling the scope of application of the tools. Our findings can help inform the designers of refactoring tools.publishedVersio