代码审查问题中的交际意图

Felipe Ebert, F. C. Filho, Nicole Novielli, Alexander Serebrenik
{"title":"代码审查问题中的交际意图","authors":"Felipe Ebert, F. C. Filho, Nicole Novielli, Alexander Serebrenik","doi":"10.1109/ICSME.2018.00061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During code review, developers request clarifications, suggest improvements, or ask for explanations about the rationale behind the implementation choices. We envision the emergence of tools to support developers during code review based on the automatic analysis of the argumentation structure and communicative intentions conveyed by developers' comments. As a preliminary step towards this goal, we conducted an exploratory case study by manually classifying 499 questions extracted from 399 Android code reviews to understand the real communicative intentions they convey. We observed that the majority of questions actually serve information seeking goals. Still, they represent less than half of the annotated sample, with other questions being used to serve a wider variety of developers' communication goals, including suggestions, request for action, and criticism. Based on our findings we formulate hypotheses on communicative intentions in code reviews that should be confirmed or rejected by follow-up studies.","PeriodicalId":6572,"journal":{"name":"2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)","volume":"42 1","pages":"519-523"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communicative Intention in Code Review Questions\",\"authors\":\"Felipe Ebert, F. C. Filho, Nicole Novielli, Alexander Serebrenik\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICSME.2018.00061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During code review, developers request clarifications, suggest improvements, or ask for explanations about the rationale behind the implementation choices. We envision the emergence of tools to support developers during code review based on the automatic analysis of the argumentation structure and communicative intentions conveyed by developers' comments. As a preliminary step towards this goal, we conducted an exploratory case study by manually classifying 499 questions extracted from 399 Android code reviews to understand the real communicative intentions they convey. We observed that the majority of questions actually serve information seeking goals. Still, they represent less than half of the annotated sample, with other questions being used to serve a wider variety of developers' communication goals, including suggestions, request for action, and criticism. Based on our findings we formulate hypotheses on communicative intentions in code reviews that should be confirmed or rejected by follow-up studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":6572,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"519-523\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME.2018.00061\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME.2018.00061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

摘要

在代码审查期间,开发人员要求澄清,提出改进建议,或者要求解释实现选择背后的基本原理。我们设想在基于自动分析论证结构和由开发人员注释传达的交流意图的基础上,在代码审查期间支持开发人员的工具的出现。作为实现这一目标的第一步,我们进行了一个探索性案例研究,通过手动分类从399个Android代码审查中提取的499个问题,以了解它们传达的真实交流意图。我们观察到,大多数问题实际上都是为了寻求信息。尽管如此,它们只代表了不到一半的注释样本,其他问题被用来服务于更广泛的开发人员交流目标,包括建议、行动请求和批评。基于我们的发现,我们对代码审查中的交流意图提出了假设,这些假设应该在后续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。
Communicative Intention in Code Review Questions
During code review, developers request clarifications, suggest improvements, or ask for explanations about the rationale behind the implementation choices. We envision the emergence of tools to support developers during code review based on the automatic analysis of the argumentation structure and communicative intentions conveyed by developers' comments. As a preliminary step towards this goal, we conducted an exploratory case study by manually classifying 499 questions extracted from 399 Android code reviews to understand the real communicative intentions they convey. We observed that the majority of questions actually serve information seeking goals. Still, they represent less than half of the annotated sample, with other questions being used to serve a wider variety of developers' communication goals, including suggestions, request for action, and criticism. Based on our findings we formulate hypotheses on communicative intentions in code reviews that should be confirmed or rejected by follow-up 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
×
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