Circular dependencies and change-proneness: An empirical study

Tosin Daniel Oyetoyan, Jean-Rémy Falleri, Jens Dietrich, Kamil Jezek
{"title":"Circular dependencies and change-proneness: An empirical study","authors":"Tosin Daniel Oyetoyan, Jean-Rémy Falleri, Jens Dietrich, Kamil Jezek","doi":"10.1109/SANER.2015.7081834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Advice that circular dependencies between programming artefacts should be avoided goes back to the earliest work on software design, and is well-established and rarely questioned. However, empirical studies have shown that real-world (Java) programs are riddled with circular dependencies between artefacts on different levels of abstraction and aggregation. It has been suggested that additional heuristics could be used to distinguish between bad and harmless cycles, for instances by relating them to the hierarchical structure of the packages within a program, or to violations of additional design principles. In this study, we try to explore this question further by analysing the relationship between different kinds of circular dependencies between Java classes, and their change frequency. We find that (1) the presence of cycles can have a significant impact on the change proneness of the classes near these cycles and (2) neither subtype knowledge nor the location of the cycle within the package containment tree are suitable criteria to distinguish between critical and harmless cycles.","PeriodicalId":355949,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering (SANER)","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering (SANER)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER.2015.7081834","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

Advice that circular dependencies between programming artefacts should be avoided goes back to the earliest work on software design, and is well-established and rarely questioned. However, empirical studies have shown that real-world (Java) programs are riddled with circular dependencies between artefacts on different levels of abstraction and aggregation. It has been suggested that additional heuristics could be used to distinguish between bad and harmless cycles, for instances by relating them to the hierarchical structure of the packages within a program, or to violations of additional design principles. In this study, we try to explore this question further by analysing the relationship between different kinds of circular dependencies between Java classes, and their change frequency. We find that (1) the presence of cycles can have a significant impact on the change proneness of the classes near these cycles and (2) neither subtype knowledge nor the location of the cycle within the package containment tree are suitable criteria to distinguish between critical and harmless cycles.
循环依赖和变化倾向:一项实证研究
应该避免编程工件之间的循环依赖关系的建议可以追溯到软件设计的早期工作,并且得到了很好的验证,很少受到质疑。然而,经验研究表明,现实世界的(Java)程序充满了不同抽象和聚合级别的工件之间的循环依赖关系。有人建议,可以使用额外的启发式来区分坏循环和无害循环,例如,通过将它们与程序内包的层次结构或违反额外的设计原则联系起来。在这项研究中,我们试图通过分析Java类之间不同类型的循环依赖之间的关系以及它们的变化频率来进一步探索这个问题。我们发现(1)循环的存在可以对这些循环附近类的变化倾向产生重大影响;(2)无论是亚型知识还是循环在包装容器树中的位置都不是区分临界循环和无害循环的合适标准。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信