2015
DOI: 10.1002/spe.2334
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Empirical study of the dynamic behavior of JavaScript objects

Abstract: SUMMARYDespite the popularity of JavaScript for client-side web applications, there is a lack of effective software tools supporting JavaScript development and testing. The dynamic characteristics of JavaScript pose software engineering challenges such as program understanding and security. One important feature of JavaScript is that its objects support flexible mechanisms such as property changes at runtime and prototype-based inheritance, making it difficult to reason about object behavior. We have performed… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
(105 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mastrangelo et al [2015] studied how Java's sun.misc.Unsafe library is used in libraries and applications. Analogously, Richards et al [2010], Richards et al [2011], and Wei et al [2016] conducted a similar study, but in this case targeting JavaScript's dynamic behavior and in particular the eval function. Also for JavaScript, Madsen and Andreasen [2014] analyzed how fields are accessed via strings, while Jang et al [2010] analyzed privacy violations.…”
Section: Empirical Studies Of Large Code Basesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mastrangelo et al [2015] studied how Java's sun.misc.Unsafe library is used in libraries and applications. Analogously, Richards et al [2010], Richards et al [2011], and Wei et al [2016] conducted a similar study, but in this case targeting JavaScript's dynamic behavior and in particular the eval function. Also for JavaScript, Madsen and Andreasen [2014] analyzed how fields are accessed via strings, while Jang et al [2010] analyzed privacy violations.…”
Section: Empirical Studies Of Large Code Basesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Richards et al [2010] show that, even though most object properties are initialized while constructing the object, it is also common to add properties to or delete properties from objects afterwards. Wei et al [2016] also investigate the dynamism of objects and show that the average number of own properties per object increases from 28 just after object construction to up to 200 at the end of an object's lifetime. They also report that developers sometimes attempt to delete properties that are not present in the object.…”
Section: Results Of Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…-Dynamic code loading, e.g., through eval, is prevalent [Yue and Wang 2009;Richards et al 2010]. -Dynamically adding and removing object properties after an object has been constructed is common [Richards et al 2010;Wei et al 2016]. -Prototype hierarchies often change at runtime [Richards et al 2010;Wei et al 2016].…”
Section: Implications Of Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wei et al, 25 performed an empirical study on JavaScript applications to understand the dynamic behavior of objects. The authors defined and evaluated several dynamic metrics on user and native objects.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%