工作会议:大规模编程的实证研究:如何进行?

M. Petre
{"title":"工作会议:大规模编程的实证研究:如何进行?","authors":"M. Petre","doi":"10.1109/WPC.2000.852503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Studying software design is a juggling act of tradeoffs and constraints. There are good, pragmatic reasons why most empirical studies of programming and software engineering have focused on programming-in-the-smalleven programming-in-the-miniature. Such research has certainly revealed some useful things. However, have we made our focus so small that we have not even noticed the real design issues? The difference between programming-in-the-small and programming-in-the large is measured, not just in lines of code, but also in data, roll calls, engineering processes, tools and environments, and - crucially - time.How can we scale up the focus of our empirical studies without exceeding feasibility? Is it enough just to change the granularity of our examination? How can we take a longitudinal view, examining software development over the whole project lifetime, rather than within a given hour in the life of a program? How at least can we look enough at programming-in-the-large to identify issues that are small, tractable, and critical? This session will begin to address the application of empirical methods to the study of programming-in-the-large, and will consider what lessons might be drawn from past research experience.","PeriodicalId":448149,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings IWPC 2000. 8th International Workshop on Program Comprehension","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Working session: empirical studies of programming-in-the-large: how?\",\"authors\":\"M. Petre\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/WPC.2000.852503\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Studying software design is a juggling act of tradeoffs and constraints. There are good, pragmatic reasons why most empirical studies of programming and software engineering have focused on programming-in-the-smalleven programming-in-the-miniature. Such research has certainly revealed some useful things. However, have we made our focus so small that we have not even noticed the real design issues? The difference between programming-in-the-small and programming-in-the large is measured, not just in lines of code, but also in data, roll calls, engineering processes, tools and environments, and - crucially - time.How can we scale up the focus of our empirical studies without exceeding feasibility? Is it enough just to change the granularity of our examination? How can we take a longitudinal view, examining software development over the whole project lifetime, rather than within a given hour in the life of a program? How at least can we look enough at programming-in-the-large to identify issues that are small, tractable, and critical? This session will begin to address the application of empirical methods to the study of programming-in-the-large, and will consider what lessons might be drawn from past research experience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":448149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings IWPC 2000. 8th International Workshop on Program Comprehension\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings IWPC 2000. 8th International Workshop on Program Comprehension\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/WPC.2000.852503\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings IWPC 2000. 8th International Workshop on Program Comprehension","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/WPC.2000.852503","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学习软件设计是一种权衡和约束的杂耍行为。大多数编程和软件工程的实证研究都集中在“小编程”甚至“微型编程”上,这是有很好的、实用的原因的。这样的研究确实揭示了一些有用的东西。然而,我们是否把我们的关注点太小,以至于我们甚至没有注意到真正的设计问题?小规模编程和大规模编程之间的区别是可以衡量的,不仅仅是代码行数,还包括数据、点名、工程流程、工具和环境,以及至关重要的时间。如何在不超越可行性的前提下扩大实证研究的重点?仅仅改变我们检查的粒度就足够了吗?我们如何采取纵向的观点,在整个项目生命周期中检查软件开发,而不是在程序生命周期中的给定小时内?我们如何才能至少充分了解大规模编程,从而识别出小的、可处理的和关键的问题?本课程将开始讨论经验方法在大型编程研究中的应用,并将考虑从过去的研究经验中可以吸取哪些教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Working session: empirical studies of programming-in-the-large: how?
Studying software design is a juggling act of tradeoffs and constraints. There are good, pragmatic reasons why most empirical studies of programming and software engineering have focused on programming-in-the-smalleven programming-in-the-miniature. Such research has certainly revealed some useful things. However, have we made our focus so small that we have not even noticed the real design issues? The difference between programming-in-the-small and programming-in-the large is measured, not just in lines of code, but also in data, roll calls, engineering processes, tools and environments, and - crucially - time.How can we scale up the focus of our empirical studies without exceeding feasibility? Is it enough just to change the granularity of our examination? How can we take a longitudinal view, examining software development over the whole project lifetime, rather than within a given hour in the life of a program? How at least can we look enough at programming-in-the-large to identify issues that are small, tractable, and critical? This session will begin to address the application of empirical methods to the study of programming-in-the-large, and will consider what lessons might be drawn from past research experience.
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
×
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