An Initial Investigation into Change-Based Reconstruction of Floss-Refactorings

Soetens, Quinten David; Pérez, Javier; Demeyer, Serge

doi:10.1109/icsm.2013.53

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Demeyer et al [5] proposed an approach to detect (reconstruct) refactorings that are applied between two software versions based on the change history. The scope of this contribution is different than the one proposed in this paper, since our aim is to suggest refactoring solutions to be applied in the future to improve software quality while maintaining the consistency with the change history.…”

Section: The Use Of Historical Data In Software Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We consider another kind of coupling to assess the context similarity. This measure is based on vocabulary-based similarity [5], also called conceptual coupling [56], and uses semantic information obtained from source, encoded in identifiers and comments.…”

Section: Similarity With Recorded Refactorings Applied To Similar Conmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tokenisation is performed using the Camel Case Splitter which is one of the most used techniques in Software Maintenance tools for the preprocessing of identifiers. To extract vocabulary from comment, a stop word list is used to cut-off and filter all common English words5 .In addition, we excluded all the Java keywords (e.g., boolean, abstract, class, string, etc.). Furthermore, our semantic similarity utilizes WordNet 6 to enrich the extracted vocabulary.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Improving multi-objective code-smells correction using development history

Ouni

Kessentini

Sahraoui

et al. 2015

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Use Of Historical Data In Software Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Similarity With Recorded Refactorings Applied To Similar Conmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Improving multi-objective code-smells correction using development history

Ouni

Kessentini

Sahraoui

et al. 2015

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Taneja and Dig et al [5,43] present tools (RefactoringCrawler and RefacLib) to detect refactoring between different versions of libraries. Soetens et al [41] detect refactoring operations as actual changes are happening in an integrated development environment, and thus achieve higher accuracy than previous work. Origin analysis has also been used to detect refactoring [15] by capturing certain kinds of cross-function changes and how call relations change between two versions of a program.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Some focus on the detection of refactoring operations that have happened and are recorded in the version histories of a project (e.g., [4,25,41,43,47]), so as to reconstruct those operations. Other studies focus on formal definitions of refactoring operations (e.g., [38,39,44]), so as to help ensure semantic equivalence or correctness of code refactoring.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scalable detection of missed cross-function refactorings

Milea

Jiang

Khoo

2014

Proceedings of the 2014 International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Refactoring is an important way to improve the design of existing code. Identifying refactoring opportunities (i.e., code fragments that can be refactored) in large code bases is a challenging task. In this paper, we propose a novel, automated and scalable technique for identifying cross-function refactoring opportunities that span more than one function (e.g., Extract Method and Inline Method). The key of our technique is the design of efficient vector inlining operations that emulate the effect of method inlining among code fragments, so that the problem of identifying cross-function refactoring can be reduced to the problem of finding similar vectors before and after inlining. We have implemented our technique in a prototype tool named ReDex which encodes Java programs to particular vectors. We have applied the tool to a large code base, 4.5 million lines of code, comprising of 200 bundle projects in the Eclipse ecosystem (e.g., Eclipse JDT, Eclipse PDE, Apache Commons, Hamcrest, etc.). Also, different from many other studies on detecting refactoring, ReDex only searches for code fragments that can be, but have not yet been, refactored in a way similar to some refactoring that happened in the code base. Our results show that ReDex can find 277 cross-function refactoring opportunities in 2 minutes, and 223 cases were labelled as true opportunities by users, and cover many categories of cross-function refactoring operations in classical refactoring books, such as Self Encapsulate Field, Decompose Conditional Expression, Hide Delegate, Preserve Whole Object, etc.

show abstract