An 80-20 Analysis of Buggy and Non-buggy Refactorings in Open-Source Commits

S. Counsell, Vesna Nowack, T. Hall, David Bowes, Saemundur O. Haraldsson, E. Winter, J. Woodward
{"title":"An 80-20 Analysis of Buggy and Non-buggy Refactorings in Open-Source Commits","authors":"S. Counsell, Vesna Nowack, T. Hall, David Bowes, Saemundur O. Haraldsson, E. Winter, J. Woodward","doi":"10.1109/SEAA56994.2022.00038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this short paper, we explore the Pareto principle, sometimes known as the “80-20” rule as part of the refactoring process. We explore five frequently applied refactorings, namely extract method, extract variable, rename variable, rename method and change variable type from a data set of forty open-source systems and nearly two hundred thousand refactorings. We address two key research questions. Firstly, do 80% of “buggy” refactorings (where a refactoring has induced a bug fix) arise from just 20% of commits and, secondly, does the same rule apply to “non-buggy” refactorings when applied to the same systems? To facilitate our analysis, we used refactoring and bug data from a study by Di Penta et al. Results showed that refactorings inducing bugs were clustered around a more concentrated set of commits than refactorings that did not induce bugs. One refactoring ‘change variable type’ stood out - it almost conformed to an 80-20 rule. The take-away message is, as the saying goes, that too much of a “good” thing [refactoring] could actually be a “bad” thing.","PeriodicalId":269970,"journal":{"name":"2022 48th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA)","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 48th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA56994.2022.00038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this short paper, we explore the Pareto principle, sometimes known as the “80-20” rule as part of the refactoring process. We explore five frequently applied refactorings, namely extract method, extract variable, rename variable, rename method and change variable type from a data set of forty open-source systems and nearly two hundred thousand refactorings. We address two key research questions. Firstly, do 80% of “buggy” refactorings (where a refactoring has induced a bug fix) arise from just 20% of commits and, secondly, does the same rule apply to “non-buggy” refactorings when applied to the same systems? To facilitate our analysis, we used refactoring and bug data from a study by Di Penta et al. Results showed that refactorings inducing bugs were clustered around a more concentrated set of commits than refactorings that did not induce bugs. One refactoring ‘change variable type’ stood out - it almost conformed to an 80-20 rule. The take-away message is, as the saying goes, that too much of a “good” thing [refactoring] could actually be a “bad” thing.
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
开源提交中有bug和无bug重构的80-20分析
在这篇短文中,我们探讨了Pareto原则,有时也被称为“80-20”规则,作为重构过程的一部分。我们从40个开源系统和近20万次重构的数据集中探索了五种常用的重构方法,即提取方法、提取变量、重命名变量、重命名方法和更改变量类型。我们解决两个关键的研究问题。首先,80%的“有bug的”重构(重构导致了bug修复)是否来自20%的提交?其次,同样的规则是否适用于同样的系统的“无bug的”重构?为了便于分析,我们使用了来自Di Penta等人研究的重构和bug数据。结果表明,与不引起bug的重构相比,引起bug的重构更集中在一组提交上。其中一个重构“改变变量类型”很突出——它几乎符合二八法则。正如俗话所说,这里传递的信息是,过多的“好”事情(重构)实际上可能是一件“坏”事情。
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
Service Classification through Machine Learning: Aiding in the Efficient Identification of Reusable Assets in Cloud Application Development Handling Environmental Uncertainty in Design Time Access Control Analysis How are software datasets constructed in Empirical Software Engineering studies? A systematic mapping study Microservices smell detection through dynamic analysis Towards Secure Agile Software Development Process: A Practice-Based Model
×
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:481959085
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