Assessing the effect of source code characteristics on changeability

Maintenance is the phase of the software lifecycle that comprises any modification after the delivery of an application. Modifications during this phase include correcting faults, improving internal attributes, as well as adapting the application to different environments. As application knowledge and architectural integrity degrade over time, so does the facility with which changes to the application are introduced. Thus, eliminating source code that presents characteristics that hamper maintenance becomes necessary if the application is to evolve. We group these characteristics under the term Source Code Issues. Even though there is support for detecting Source Code Issues, the extent of their harmfulness for maintenance remains unknown. One of the most studied Source Code Issue is cloning. Clones are duplicated code, usually created as programmers copy, paste, and customize existing source code. However, there is no agreement on the harmfulness of clones. This thesis proposes and follows a novel methodology to assess the effect of clones on the changeability of methods. Changeability is the ease with which a source code entity is modified. It is assessed through metrics calculated from the history of changes of the methods. The impact of clones on the changeability of methods is measured by comparing the metrics of methods that contain clones to those that do not. Source code characteristics are then tested to establish whether they are endemic of methods whose changeability decay increase when cloned. In addition to findings on the harmfulness of cloning, this thesis contributes a methodology that can be applied to assess the harmfulness of other Source Code Issues. The contributions of this thesis are twofold. First, the findings answer the question about the harmfulness of clones on changeability by showing that cloned methods are more likely to change, and that some cloned methods have significantly higher changeability decay when cloned. Furthermore, it offers a characterization of such harmful clones. Second, the methodology provides a guide to analyze the effect of Source Code Characteristics in changeability; and therefore, can be adapted for other Source Code Issues

The conduct of war and the notion of victory: a theory and definition of victory

Clausewitz described military victory as a condition where the enemy‘s ability to enter battle, resist or resume hostilities is destroyed. The concept summarises the paradigm of success that preceded Clausewitz and survived through much of the 20th century. Despite increasingly paradoxical outcomes in the last century and the current one, military planners, strategists and statesmen sought answers for failures in different places, only a few questioned the validity of the notion of victory that Clausewitz had so veritably summarised. The fundamental question that begs an answer is ‗what is victory?‘ The rapid transformation in society and international culture has brought with it changes in geo-political and geo-economic relationships as well as warfare. While the traditional linkages between war and politics remain, the mechanisms driving these have altered. In less than absolute wars, it is the wider bargain and the stakes in that bargain that make the ‗enemy do our will‘ and not purely an inability to enter battle, resist or resume hostilities. The new complexities surrounding war and diplomacy necessitate an organising theory to make better sense of policy and action. This research provides one such theory. War is ultimately a violent clash of societies and its character a reflection of opposing cultures, history and experiences. An external dimension to strategy is thus always at work even if not fully recognised; as is often the case. Such un-factored influences create a sort of volatility in victory and defeat adding new challenges while offering opportunities at the same time. Similarly, diplomacy, which invariably precedes and succeeds coercive or compelling use of violence, too is fettered by such external influences. A bivariate approach that triangulates desired ends with the opposing notions of success and perception of defeat is argued. The theory presented encapsulates traditional precepts, adds new ones and simplifies the complexities that have come to surround victory in contemporary times. Offered here are some valuable ingredient to flavour any strategic recipe, not just war and conflict. The eternal challenge of calibrating means and ends needed more systematic awareness of functional and dominant domains of victory which is arguably possible through application of simple principles. The theory potentially allows for a more focused, proportionate, efficient and productive use of power. It is hoped that strategists and analysts alike, would find here new concepts and tools for use in praxis, perspective planning and retrospective analyses

Speaking of Diversity

Originally published in 1992. In this collection of essays, Philip Gleason explores the different linguistic tools that American scholars have used to write about ethnicity in the United States and analyzes how various vocabularies have played out in the political sphere. In doing this, he reveals tensions between terms used by academic groups and those preferred by the people whom the academics discuss. Gleason unpacks words and phrases—such as melting pot and plurality—used to visualize the multitude of ethnicities in the United States. And he examines debates over concepts such as "assimilation," "national character," "oppressed group," and "people of color." Gleason advocates for greater clarity of these concepts when discussed in America's national political arena. Gleason's essays are grouped into three parts. Part 1 focuses on linguistic analyses of specific terms. Part 2 examines the effect of World War II on national identity and American thought about diversity and intergroup relations. Part 3 discusses discourse on the diversity of religions. This collection of eleven essays sharpens our historical understanding of the evolution of language used to define diversity in twentieth-century America