持续代码质量:我们(真的)在这样做吗?

Carmine Vassallo, Fabio Palomba, Alberto Bacchelli, H. Gall
{"title":"持续代码质量:我们(真的)在这样做吗?","authors":"Carmine Vassallo, Fabio Palomba, Alberto Bacchelli, H. Gall","doi":"10.1145/3238147.3240729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Continuous Integration (CI) is a software engineering practice where developers constantly integrate their changes to a project through an automated build process. The goal of CI is to provide developers with prompt feedback on several quality dimensions after each change. Indeed, previous studies provided empirical evidence on a positive association between properly following CI principles and source code quality. A core principle behind CI is Continuous Code Quality (also known as CCQ, which includes automated testing and automated code inspection) may appear simple and effective, yet we know little about its practical adoption. In this paper, we propose a preliminary empirical investigation aimed at understanding how rigorously practitioners follow CCQ. Our study reveals a strong dichotomy between theory and practice: developers do not perform continuous inspection but rather control for quality only at the end of a sprint and most of the times only on the release branch. Preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341036]. Data and Materials [http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341015].","PeriodicalId":6622,"journal":{"name":"2018 33rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE)","volume":"24 1","pages":"790-795"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"32","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Continuous Code Quality: Are We (Really) Doing That?\",\"authors\":\"Carmine Vassallo, Fabio Palomba, Alberto Bacchelli, H. Gall\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3238147.3240729\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Continuous Integration (CI) is a software engineering practice where developers constantly integrate their changes to a project through an automated build process. The goal of CI is to provide developers with prompt feedback on several quality dimensions after each change. Indeed, previous studies provided empirical evidence on a positive association between properly following CI principles and source code quality. A core principle behind CI is Continuous Code Quality (also known as CCQ, which includes automated testing and automated code inspection) may appear simple and effective, yet we know little about its practical adoption. In this paper, we propose a preliminary empirical investigation aimed at understanding how rigorously practitioners follow CCQ. Our study reveals a strong dichotomy between theory and practice: developers do not perform continuous inspection but rather control for quality only at the end of a sprint and most of the times only on the release branch. Preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341036]. Data and Materials [http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341015].\",\"PeriodicalId\":6622,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2018 33rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE)\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"790-795\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"32\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2018 33rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3238147.3240729\",\"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 33rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3238147.3240729","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

摘要

持续集成(CI)是一种软件工程实践,开发人员通过自动化构建过程不断地将他们的更改集成到项目中。CI的目标是在每次更改之后,向开发人员提供关于几个质量维度的及时反馈。事实上,以前的研究提供了经验证据,证明正确遵循CI原则与源代码质量之间存在正相关关系。CI背后的核心原则是持续代码质量(也称为CCQ,包括自动测试和自动代码检查),它看起来简单有效,但我们对其实际应用知之甚少。在本文中,我们提出了一个初步的实证调查,旨在了解从业者如何严格遵循CCQ。我们的研究揭示了理论和实践之间的强烈二分法:开发人员不执行持续的检查,而是只在冲刺结束时进行质量控制,大多数时候只在发布分支上进行控制。预印本[https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341036]。数据和资料[http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341015]。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Continuous Code Quality: Are We (Really) Doing That?
Continuous Integration (CI) is a software engineering practice where developers constantly integrate their changes to a project through an automated build process. The goal of CI is to provide developers with prompt feedback on several quality dimensions after each change. Indeed, previous studies provided empirical evidence on a positive association between properly following CI principles and source code quality. A core principle behind CI is Continuous Code Quality (also known as CCQ, which includes automated testing and automated code inspection) may appear simple and effective, yet we know little about its practical adoption. In this paper, we propose a preliminary empirical investigation aimed at understanding how rigorously practitioners follow CCQ. Our study reveals a strong dichotomy between theory and practice: developers do not perform continuous inspection but rather control for quality only at the end of a sprint and most of the times only on the release branch. Preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341036]. Data and Materials [http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341015].
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