2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-22183-0_21
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automated Transplantation of Call Graph and Layout Features into Kate

Abstract: Abstract. We report the automated transplantation of two features currently missing from Kate: call graph generation and automatic layout for C programs, which have been requested by users on the Kate development forum. Our approach uses a lightweight annotation system with Search Based techniques augmented by static analysis for automated transplanting. The results are promising: on average, our tool requires 101 minutes of standard desktop machine time to transplant the call graph feature, and 31 minutes to … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Then we extract three Java organs with real-world functions from three Java corpuses [1, 2, 3] and transplant them into a Java real-world application. To the best of our knowledge, this dataset, containing thirty-three real-world organs, is the largest one from open-source repository for transplantation study so far and it is different from datasets used by state-of-the-art tools like mu_scalpel [14]: it is extracted from codes added by developers in opensource environment while previous ones are from ready-made systems or software.…”
Section: B Datasetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Then we extract three Java organs with real-world functions from three Java corpuses [1, 2, 3] and transplant them into a Java real-world application. To the best of our knowledge, this dataset, containing thirty-three real-world organs, is the largest one from open-source repository for transplantation study so far and it is different from datasets used by state-of-the-art tools like mu_scalpel [14]: it is extracted from codes added by developers in opensource environment while previous ones are from ready-made systems or software.…”
Section: B Datasetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…GI is often applied to non-functional properties of software but perhaps it is most famous for improving program's functionality, e.g. by removing bugs [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16] or adding to its abilities [17,18,19,20,21,22]. Non-functional improvements that have been considered or results reported include: faster code [23,24], code which uses less energy [25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34] or less memory [35], and automatic parallelisation [36,37,38] and automatic porting [39] and embedded systems [40,41,25,42,43,44,45] as well as refactorisation [46], reverse engineering [47,48] and software product lines [49,50].…”
Section: Genetic Improvementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Genetic Improvement has been used to improve the performance of existing software, e.g. by reducing runtime [Langdon and Harman, 2015b], energy [Bruce et al, 2015] or memory consumption [Wu et al, 2015], but (apart from software transplanting [Marginean et al, 2015] and automatic bug fixing [Le Goues et al, 2012]) it usually tries not to change programs' output. GGGP builds on Genetic Improvement which is very much hands off (i.e.…”
Section: Evolving Rnafoldmentioning
confidence: 99%