7,557 research outputs found

    Pair programming and the re-appropriation of individual tools for collaborative software development

    Get PDF
    Although pair programming is becoming more prevalent in software development, and a number of reports have been written about it [10] [13], few have addressed the manner in which pairing actually takes place [12]. Even fewer consider the methods used to manage issues such as role change or the communication of complex issues. This paper highlights the way resources designed for individuals are re-appropriated and augmented by pair programmers to facilitate collaboration. It also illustrates that pair verbalisations can augment the benefits of the collocated team, providing examples from ethnographic studies of pair programmers 'in the wild'

    Untangling Fine-Grained Code Changes

    Get PDF
    After working for some time, developers commit their code changes to a version control system. When doing so, they often bundle unrelated changes (e.g., bug fix and refactoring) in a single commit, thus creating a so-called tangled commit. Sharing tangled commits is problematic because it makes review, reversion, and integration of these commits harder and historical analyses of the project less reliable. Researchers have worked at untangling existing commits, i.e., finding which part of a commit relates to which task. In this paper, we contribute to this line of work in two ways: (1) A publicly available dataset of untangled code changes, created with the help of two developers who accurately split their code changes into self contained tasks over a period of four months; (2) a novel approach, EpiceaUntangler, to help developers share untangled commits (aka. atomic commits) by using fine-grained code change information. EpiceaUntangler is based and tested on the publicly available dataset, and further evaluated by deploying it to 7 developers, who used it for 2 weeks. We recorded a median success rate of 91% and average one of 75%, in automatically creating clusters of untangled fine-grained code changes

    Distributed-Pair Programming can work well and is not just Distributed Pair-Programming

    Full text link
    Background: Distributed Pair Programming can be performed via screensharing or via a distributed IDE. The latter offers the freedom of concurrent editing (which may be helpful or damaging) and has even more awareness deficits than screen sharing. Objective: Characterize how competent distributed pair programmers may handle this additional freedom and these additional awareness deficits and characterize the impacts on the pair programming process. Method: A revelatory case study, based on direct observation of a single, highly competent distributed pair of industrial software developers during a 3-day collaboration. We use recordings of these sessions and conceptualize the phenomena seen. Results: 1. Skilled pairs may bridge the awareness deficits without visible obstruction of the overall process. 2. Skilled pairs may use the additional editing freedom in a useful limited fashion, resulting in potentially better fluency of the process than local pair programming. Conclusion: When applied skillfully in an appropriate context, distributed-pair programming can (not will!) work at least as well as local pair programming

    Modularizing and Specifying Protocols among Threads

    Full text link
    We identify three problems with current techniques for implementing protocols among threads, which complicate and impair the scalability of multicore software development: implementing synchronization, implementing coordination, and modularizing protocols. To mend these deficiencies, we argue for the use of domain-specific languages (DSL) based on existing models of concurrency. To demonstrate the feasibility of this proposal, we explain how to use the model of concurrency Reo as a high-level protocol DSL, which offers appropriate abstractions and a natural separation of protocols and computations. We describe a Reo-to-Java compiler and illustrate its use through examples.Comment: In Proceedings PLACES 2012, arXiv:1302.579
    • …
    corecore