IMPACT OF CODE OWNERSHIP IMPACT OF CODE OWNERSHIP ON ATIPATTERNS ON ATIPATTERNS
Stéphane BUNOD Engineering school student at Polytech’Montpellier 3 month internship Supervisor : Foutse KHOMH
IMPACT OF CODE OWNERSHIP IMPACT OF CODE OWNERSHIP ON ATIPATTERNS - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
IMPACT OF CODE OWNERSHIP IMPACT OF CODE OWNERSHIP ON ATIPATTERNS ON ATIPATTERNS Stphane BUNOD Engineering school student at PolytechMontpellier 3 month internship Supervisor : Foutse KHOMH OUTLINE OUTLINE Context Goal
Stéphane BUNOD Engineering school student at Polytech’Montpellier 3 month internship Supervisor : Foutse KHOMH
Foutse’s research interests Developping techniques and tools to assess the quality of systems Design patterns, design defects : their impact on the quality of systems and their evolution in systems Foutse “Antipatterns are more fault prone” . 2012 Christian Bird. Don’t Touch My Code! Examining the Effects of Ownership on Software Quality. 2011
– EXISTING WORK EXISTING WORK
Previous work from Francis NAHM:
List of AntiPatterns for each version of the Argouml project (APs example : ComplexClass, LongMethod, LongParameterList)
– COLLECT COLLECT
Collect information about the Argouml project:
– WHAT IS INTERESTING IN WHAT IS INTERESTING IN « « SVN LOG SVN LOG » »
– KEEP INTERESTING INFORMATION KEEP INTERESTING INFORMATION
– EVALUATE MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR RATE EVALUATE MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR RATE
Major contributor: A developer who has made changes to a component and whose
from such a developer is a major contribution.
– ADD INFORMATION OF MC ON EACH VERSION ADD INFORMATION OF MC ON EACH VERSION
– WHAT THE CSV LOOKS LIKE WHAT THE CSV LOOKS LIKE
– METHOD TO ESTIMATE THE EVOLUTION OF A CLASS METHOD TO ESTIMATE THE EVOLUTION OF A CLASS List of the occurrence of AntiPatterns for each class. Example: [5, 3, 4, 4, 1, 2, 5] [0]: A-A-A-A-A-S [1]: D-D-A-A-D [2]: S-A-A-D [3]: A-A-D [4]: D-D [5]: D A = 11 ; D = 8 ; S = 2
– DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF LIST DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF LIST
Only MC No MC Only MC on the 1st version Become MC No longer MC Stable 58% 73,63% 74,40% 87,13% 79,18% Amelioration 24% 11,55% 7,76% 1,98% 14,46% Degradation 18% 14,82% 20,84% 10,89% 6,36%
characterized quickly and the fix will be obvious to someone“