An empirical comparison between pair development and software inspection in Thailand

Monvorath Phongpaibul, B. Boehm
{"title":"An empirical comparison between pair development and software inspection in Thailand","authors":"Monvorath Phongpaibul, B. Boehm","doi":"10.1145/1159733.1159749","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although pair programming and software inspection have the common aim of minimizing the defects of the software product, each practice has its strengths and weaknesses. We need to understand their costs and benefits under given conditions to be able to select a practice to execute in a development project. The objective of this study is to compare the commonalities and differences between pair development and software inspection as verification techniques in Thailand. One classroom experiment and one industry experiment were conducted. The development effort and effect of quality were investigated with some additional calendar time comparisons. The classroom results showed that average development effort of the pair development group was 24% less than inspection group with the improved product quality. The industry experiment showed pair development to have about 4% more effort but about 40% fewer major defects. In addition, the impacts of cultural differences to the adoption of pair programming or software inspection in Thailand are discussed.","PeriodicalId":201305,"journal":{"name":"International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering","volume":"242 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"37","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1159733.1159749","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

Abstract

Although pair programming and software inspection have the common aim of minimizing the defects of the software product, each practice has its strengths and weaknesses. We need to understand their costs and benefits under given conditions to be able to select a practice to execute in a development project. The objective of this study is to compare the commonalities and differences between pair development and software inspection as verification techniques in Thailand. One classroom experiment and one industry experiment were conducted. The development effort and effect of quality were investigated with some additional calendar time comparisons. The classroom results showed that average development effort of the pair development group was 24% less than inspection group with the improved product quality. The industry experiment showed pair development to have about 4% more effort but about 40% fewer major defects. In addition, the impacts of cultural differences to the adoption of pair programming or software inspection in Thailand are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
结对开发与泰国软件检验的实证比较
尽管结对编程和软件检查的共同目标是最小化软件产品的缺陷,但每种实践都有其优点和缺点。我们需要了解它们在给定条件下的成本和收益,以便能够选择在开发项目中执行的实践。本研究的目的是比较泰国结对开发和软件检查作为验证技术之间的共性和差异。进行了一次课堂实验和一次工业实验。通过一些额外的日历时间比较,研究了开发工作量和质量效果。课堂结果显示,产品质量提高后,结对开发组的平均开发工作量比检查组少24%。工业实验表明,结对开发的工作量增加了约4%,但主要缺陷减少了约40%。此外,文化差异对结对编程或软件检查在泰国的采用的影响进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
An empirical study of developers views on software reuse in statoil ASA Agile customer engagement: a longitudinal qualitative case study Evaluating advantages of test driven development: a controlled experiment with professionals Evaluating guidelines for empirical software engineering studies Maximising the information gained from an experimental analysis of code inspection and static analysis for concurrent java components
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1