三种程序探索工具的比较研究

B. D. Alwis, G. Murphy, M. Robillard
{"title":"三种程序探索工具的比较研究","authors":"B. D. Alwis, G. Murphy, M. Robillard","doi":"10.1109/ICPC.2007.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Programmers need tools to help explore large software systems when performing software evolution tasks. A variety of tools have been created to improve the effectiveness of such exploration. The usefulness of these tools has been argued largely on the basis of case studies, small narrowly-focussed experiments, or non-human-based experiments. In this paper, we report on a more rigorously controlled study of three specialized software exploration tools in which professional programmers used the tools to plan complex change tasks to a medium-sized code base. We found that the tools had little apparent effect; the effects observed instead appear to be dominated by individual styles and strategies of the programmers and characteristics of the tasks. In addition to presenting the results of the study, this paper introduces the use of two experimental evaluation aids: the NASA task load index (TLX) for assessing task difficulty and distance profiles for assessing the to which programmers remain on-track.","PeriodicalId":135871,"journal":{"name":"15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07)","volume":"161 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Study of Three Program Exploration Tools\",\"authors\":\"B. D. Alwis, G. Murphy, M. Robillard\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICPC.2007.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Programmers need tools to help explore large software systems when performing software evolution tasks. A variety of tools have been created to improve the effectiveness of such exploration. The usefulness of these tools has been argued largely on the basis of case studies, small narrowly-focussed experiments, or non-human-based experiments. In this paper, we report on a more rigorously controlled study of three specialized software exploration tools in which professional programmers used the tools to plan complex change tasks to a medium-sized code base. We found that the tools had little apparent effect; the effects observed instead appear to be dominated by individual styles and strategies of the programmers and characteristics of the tasks. In addition to presenting the results of the study, this paper introduces the use of two experimental evaluation aids: the NASA task load index (TLX) for assessing task difficulty and distance profiles for assessing the to which programmers remain on-track.\",\"PeriodicalId\":135871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07)\",\"volume\":\"161 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"34\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPC.2007.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPC.2007.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34

摘要

程序员在执行软件进化任务时需要工具来帮助探索大型软件系统。人们发明了各种工具来提高这种勘探的有效性。这些工具的有用性在很大程度上是基于案例研究、小范围的实验或非人类实验而争论的。在本文中,我们报告了对三种专门的软件探索工具的更严格控制的研究,其中专业程序员使用这些工具来计划中型代码库的复杂变更任务。我们发现这些工具几乎没有明显的效果;相反,观察到的效果似乎是由程序员的个人风格和策略以及任务的特征所主导的。除了展示研究结果外,本文还介绍了两种实验评估辅助工具的使用:用于评估任务难度的NASA任务负载指数(TLX)和用于评估程序员保持在轨道上的距离概况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Study of Three Program Exploration Tools
Programmers need tools to help explore large software systems when performing software evolution tasks. A variety of tools have been created to improve the effectiveness of such exploration. The usefulness of these tools has been argued largely on the basis of case studies, small narrowly-focussed experiments, or non-human-based experiments. In this paper, we report on a more rigorously controlled study of three specialized software exploration tools in which professional programmers used the tools to plan complex change tasks to a medium-sized code base. We found that the tools had little apparent effect; the effects observed instead appear to be dominated by individual styles and strategies of the programmers and characteristics of the tasks. In addition to presenting the results of the study, this paper introduces the use of two experimental evaluation aids: the NASA task load index (TLX) for assessing task difficulty and distance profiles for assessing the to which programmers remain on-track.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信