On the Alignment of Source Code Quality Perspectives through Experimentation: An Industrial Case

Talita Vieira Ribeiro, G. Travassos
{"title":"On the Alignment of Source Code Quality Perspectives through Experimentation: An Industrial Case","authors":"Talita Vieira Ribeiro, G. Travassos","doi":"10.1109/CESI.2015.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"CONTEXT. Alignment is a key factor for success in many software development projects. Aligned teams are capable of bringing collaboration and positive results to companies; whereas misalignment among developers can make a conflicted environment and even lead the project to failure. OBJECTIVE. To assist developers in an embedded software development company in their conceptual alignment regarding source code quality. METHOD. In the organizational context, plan and perform a series of studies such as surveys, systematic literature review (SLR), qualitative data analysis and focus group to support the identification of conceptual misalignments among developers and establish common terminology and guidance concerning source code quality. RESULTS. The results from a survey conducted in one company showed a conceptual misalignment among developers regarding the source code quality that was triggering continuous rework during software evolution activities. Through an SLR and a qualitative analysis of code snippets, a set of evidence-based coding guidelines for readability and understandability of source code were formulated. These guidelines were evaluated and used as an instrument for aligning source code perspectives during a focus group, showing their feasibility and adequacy to the company's context. CONCLUSIONS. The use of all contextual information observed - e.g. teams' locations, software development context, and time constraints - along with the information gathered during the industry-academia collaboration was particularly important to help us appropriately chose research methods to be used, and formulate evidence-based coding guidelines that matched the company's needs and expectations. Further evaluations have to be carried out to ensure the quality impact of some guidelines proposed before using them all over the company.","PeriodicalId":222668,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE/ACM 3rd International Workshop on Conducting Empirical Studies in Industry","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE/ACM 3rd International Workshop on Conducting Empirical Studies in Industry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CESI.2015.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

CONTEXT. Alignment is a key factor for success in many software development projects. Aligned teams are capable of bringing collaboration and positive results to companies; whereas misalignment among developers can make a conflicted environment and even lead the project to failure. OBJECTIVE. To assist developers in an embedded software development company in their conceptual alignment regarding source code quality. METHOD. In the organizational context, plan and perform a series of studies such as surveys, systematic literature review (SLR), qualitative data analysis and focus group to support the identification of conceptual misalignments among developers and establish common terminology and guidance concerning source code quality. RESULTS. The results from a survey conducted in one company showed a conceptual misalignment among developers regarding the source code quality that was triggering continuous rework during software evolution activities. Through an SLR and a qualitative analysis of code snippets, a set of evidence-based coding guidelines for readability and understandability of source code were formulated. These guidelines were evaluated and used as an instrument for aligning source code perspectives during a focus group, showing their feasibility and adequacy to the company's context. CONCLUSIONS. The use of all contextual information observed - e.g. teams' locations, software development context, and time constraints - along with the information gathered during the industry-academia collaboration was particularly important to help us appropriately chose research methods to be used, and formulate evidence-based coding guidelines that matched the company's needs and expectations. Further evaluations have to be carried out to ensure the quality impact of some guidelines proposed before using them all over the company.
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
通过实验对源代码质量观点进行校准:一个工业案例
上下文。在许多软件开发项目中,一致性是成功的关键因素。协调一致的团队能够为公司带来协作和积极成果;然而,开发人员之间的不协调可能会造成冲突的环境,甚至导致项目失败。目标。协助嵌入式软件开发公司的开发人员对源代码质量进行概念校准。方法。在组织环境中,计划并执行一系列研究,如调查、系统文献回顾(SLR)、定性数据分析和焦点小组,以支持识别开发人员之间的概念偏差,并建立有关源代码质量的通用术语和指导。结果。在一家公司进行的一项调查的结果表明,在软件开发活动中,开发人员在源代码质量方面存在概念上的不一致,这引发了持续的返工。通过对代码片段的单反和定性分析,制定了一套基于证据的源代码可读性和可理解性的编码准则。这些指导方针被评估并用作焦点小组期间调整源代码透视图的工具,显示它们对公司环境的可行性和充分性。结论。使用观察到的所有上下文信息-例如团队位置,软件开发上下文和时间限制-以及在产学研合作期间收集的信息,对于帮助我们适当地选择要使用的研究方法,并制定符合公司需求和期望的循证编码指南尤为重要。在整个公司使用之前,必须进行进一步的评估,以确保所提出的一些指导方针的质量影响。
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
Difficulty Factors of Obtaining Access for Empirical Studies in Industry I'll Tell You What I Want, What I Really, Really Want: An Industry Perspective on the Effective Application of Research in Projects How to Increase the Likelihood of Successful Transfer to Industry -- Going Beyond the Empirical Difficulties in Running Experiments in the Software Industry: Experiences from the Trenches Planning for the Unknown: Lessons Learned from Ten Months of Non-participant Exploratory Observations in the Industry
×
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