针对架构冲突的代码审查者建议:一项探索性研究

Ruiyin Li, Peng Liang, P. Avgeriou
{"title":"针对架构冲突的代码审查者建议:一项探索性研究","authors":"Ruiyin Li, Peng Liang, P. Avgeriou","doi":"10.1145/3593434.3593450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Code review is a common practice in software development and often conducted before code changes are merged into the code repository. A number of approaches for automatically recommending appropriate reviewers have been proposed to match such code changes to pertinent reviewers. However, such approaches are generic, i.e., they do not focus on specific types of issues during code reviews. In this paper, we propose an approach that focuses on architecture violations, one of the most critical type of issues identified during code review. Specifically, we aim at automating the recommendation of code reviewers, who are potentially qualified to review architecture violations, based on reviews of code changes. To this end, we selected three common similarity detection methods to measure the file path similarity of code commits and the semantic similarity of review comments. We conducted a series of experiments on finding the appropriate reviewers through evaluating and comparing these similarity detection methods in separate and combined ways with the baseline reviewer recommendation approach, RevFinder. The results show that the common similarity detection methods can produce acceptable performance scores and achieve a better performance than RevFinder. The sampling techniques used in recommending code reviewers can impact the performance of reviewer recommendation approaches. We also discuss the potential implications of our findings for both researchers and practitioners.","PeriodicalId":178596,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","volume":"3342 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Code Reviewer Recommendation for Architecture Violations: An Exploratory Study\",\"authors\":\"Ruiyin Li, Peng Liang, P. Avgeriou\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3593434.3593450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Code review is a common practice in software development and often conducted before code changes are merged into the code repository. A number of approaches for automatically recommending appropriate reviewers have been proposed to match such code changes to pertinent reviewers. However, such approaches are generic, i.e., they do not focus on specific types of issues during code reviews. In this paper, we propose an approach that focuses on architecture violations, one of the most critical type of issues identified during code review. Specifically, we aim at automating the recommendation of code reviewers, who are potentially qualified to review architecture violations, based on reviews of code changes. To this end, we selected three common similarity detection methods to measure the file path similarity of code commits and the semantic similarity of review comments. We conducted a series of experiments on finding the appropriate reviewers through evaluating and comparing these similarity detection methods in separate and combined ways with the baseline reviewer recommendation approach, RevFinder. The results show that the common similarity detection methods can produce acceptable performance scores and achieve a better performance than RevFinder. The sampling techniques used in recommending code reviewers can impact the performance of reviewer recommendation approaches. We also discuss the potential implications of our findings for both researchers and practitioners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":178596,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering\",\"volume\":\"3342 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3593434.3593450\",\"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 of the 27th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3593434.3593450","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

代码审查是软件开发中的一种常见做法,通常在将代码更改合并到代码存储库之前进行。已经提出了许多自动推荐适当的审查者的方法,以将此类代码更改匹配到相关的审查者。然而,这些方法是通用的,也就是说,它们在代码审查期间不关注特定类型的问题。在本文中,我们提出了一种专注于体系结构违反的方法,这是在代码审查期间确定的最关键的问题之一。具体地说,我们的目标是自动化代码审查者的推荐,他们可能有资格根据对代码更改的审查来审查架构违例。为此,我们选择了三种常用的相似度检测方法来度量代码提交的文件路径相似度和评审注释的语义相似度。我们对这些相似度检测方法分别与基线审稿人推荐方法RevFinder进行了评估和比较,并进行了一系列的实验来寻找合适的审稿人。结果表明,常用的相似度检测方法可以产生可接受的性能分数,并且取得比RevFinder更好的性能。在推荐代码审阅者时使用的抽样技术会影响审阅者推荐方法的性能。我们还讨论了我们的发现对研究人员和从业者的潜在影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Code Reviewer Recommendation for Architecture Violations: An Exploratory Study
Code review is a common practice in software development and often conducted before code changes are merged into the code repository. A number of approaches for automatically recommending appropriate reviewers have been proposed to match such code changes to pertinent reviewers. However, such approaches are generic, i.e., they do not focus on specific types of issues during code reviews. In this paper, we propose an approach that focuses on architecture violations, one of the most critical type of issues identified during code review. Specifically, we aim at automating the recommendation of code reviewers, who are potentially qualified to review architecture violations, based on reviews of code changes. To this end, we selected three common similarity detection methods to measure the file path similarity of code commits and the semantic similarity of review comments. We conducted a series of experiments on finding the appropriate reviewers through evaluating and comparing these similarity detection methods in separate and combined ways with the baseline reviewer recommendation approach, RevFinder. The results show that the common similarity detection methods can produce acceptable performance scores and achieve a better performance than RevFinder. The sampling techniques used in recommending code reviewers can impact the performance of reviewer recommendation approaches. We also discuss the potential implications of our findings for both researchers and practitioners.
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