评估代码审查环境中的混乱原子

Victoria Bogachenkova, Linh Nguyen, Felipe Ebert, Alexander Serebrenik, Fernando Castor
{"title":"评估代码审查环境中的混乱原子","authors":"Victoria Bogachenkova, Linh Nguyen, Felipe Ebert, Alexander Serebrenik, Fernando Castor","doi":"10.1109/ICSME55016.2022.00048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Code review is a popular software engineering practice. Success of code reviews can be threatened by confusion experienced by code reviewers. For instance, on the one hand, research has studied the reasons for confusion in code reviews, and on the other hand, it also has analyzed source code patterns, so called \"atoms of confusion\", that have been shown to lead to misunderstanding in the lab setting. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no research which tried to investigate the possible cause and effect relationship between atoms of confusion and confusion in code reviews. Another important aspect still not studied is how those atoms of confusion evolve across pull requests. In this emerging results paper, we report an exploratory case study to provide a deeper understanding of atoms of confusion, more specifically, whether atoms of confusion are related to confusion in code reviews and how they persist across pull requests. With the help of an existing tool for the detection of atoms of confusion, and a manual analysis of code reviews comments, we observed that statistical analysis did not show any relationship between atoms of confusion and presence of confusion comments in code reviews. Additionally, we found evidence that atoms of confusion are mostly not being removed in pull requests. Based on the results, we formulate hypotheses on atoms of confusion in the code review context, that should be confirmed or rejected by future studies.","PeriodicalId":300084,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Atoms of Confusion in the Context of Code Reviews\",\"authors\":\"Victoria Bogachenkova, Linh Nguyen, Felipe Ebert, Alexander Serebrenik, Fernando Castor\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICSME55016.2022.00048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Code review is a popular software engineering practice. Success of code reviews can be threatened by confusion experienced by code reviewers. For instance, on the one hand, research has studied the reasons for confusion in code reviews, and on the other hand, it also has analyzed source code patterns, so called \\\"atoms of confusion\\\", that have been shown to lead to misunderstanding in the lab setting. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no research which tried to investigate the possible cause and effect relationship between atoms of confusion and confusion in code reviews. Another important aspect still not studied is how those atoms of confusion evolve across pull requests. In this emerging results paper, we report an exploratory case study to provide a deeper understanding of atoms of confusion, more specifically, whether atoms of confusion are related to confusion in code reviews and how they persist across pull requests. With the help of an existing tool for the detection of atoms of confusion, and a manual analysis of code reviews comments, we observed that statistical analysis did not show any relationship between atoms of confusion and presence of confusion comments in code reviews. Additionally, we found evidence that atoms of confusion are mostly not being removed in pull requests. Based on the results, we formulate hypotheses on atoms of confusion in the code review context, that should be confirmed or rejected by future studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":300084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME55016.2022.00048\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME55016.2022.00048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

代码审查是一种流行的软件工程实践。代码审查的成功可能会受到代码审查者所经历的困惑的威胁。例如,一方面,研究研究了代码审查中混乱的原因,另一方面,它也分析了源代码模式,即所谓的“混乱原子”,这些模式已被证明在实验室环境中会导致误解。然而,据我们所知,还没有研究试图调查代码审查中混乱原子和混乱之间可能的因果关系。另一个尚未研究的重要方面是这些混淆原子如何在拉取请求中演变。在这篇新兴的成果论文中,我们报告了一个探索性的案例研究,以提供对混乱原子的更深入的理解,更具体地说,混乱原子是否与代码审查中的混乱有关,以及它们如何在拉请求中持续存在。在现有的检测混乱原子的工具的帮助下,以及对代码审查注释的手工分析,我们观察到统计分析并没有显示出代码审查中混乱原子和混乱注释之间的任何关系。此外,我们发现有证据表明,在拉取请求中,混淆的原子大多没有被删除。基于结果,我们对代码审查上下文中的混淆原子提出假设,这些假设应该在未来的研究中得到证实或拒绝。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evaluating Atoms of Confusion in the Context of Code Reviews
Code review is a popular software engineering practice. Success of code reviews can be threatened by confusion experienced by code reviewers. For instance, on the one hand, research has studied the reasons for confusion in code reviews, and on the other hand, it also has analyzed source code patterns, so called "atoms of confusion", that have been shown to lead to misunderstanding in the lab setting. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no research which tried to investigate the possible cause and effect relationship between atoms of confusion and confusion in code reviews. Another important aspect still not studied is how those atoms of confusion evolve across pull requests. In this emerging results paper, we report an exploratory case study to provide a deeper understanding of atoms of confusion, more specifically, whether atoms of confusion are related to confusion in code reviews and how they persist across pull requests. With the help of an existing tool for the detection of atoms of confusion, and a manual analysis of code reviews comments, we observed that statistical analysis did not show any relationship between atoms of confusion and presence of confusion comments in code reviews. Additionally, we found evidence that atoms of confusion are mostly not being removed in pull requests. Based on the results, we formulate hypotheses on atoms of confusion in the code review context, that should be confirmed or rejected by future studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
RestTestGen: An Extensible Framework for Automated Black-box Testing of RESTful APIs COBREX: A Tool for Extracting Business Rules from COBOL On the Security of Python Virtual Machines: An Empirical Study The Phantom Menace: Unmasking Security Issues in Evolving Software Impact of Defect Instances for Successful Deep Learning-based Automatic Program Repair
×
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