Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userThe Factors of Code Reviewing Process to Ensure Software Quality
215
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Shaykh Siddique
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Authors
Shaykh Siddique
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
In the era of revolution, the development of softwares are increasing daily. The quality of software impacts the most in software development. To ensure the quality of the software it needs to be reviewed and updated. The effectiveness of the code review is that it ensures the quality of software and makes it updated. Code review is the best process that helps the developers to develop a system errorless. This report contains two different code review papers to be evaluated and find the influences that can affect the code reviewing process. The reader can easily understand the factor of the code review process which is directly associated with software quality assurance.
rate research
Read More
Infrastructure-as-code (IaC) is a practice to implement continuous deployment by allowing management and provisioning of infrastructure through the definition of machine-readable files and automation around them, rather than physical hardware configuration or interactive configuration tools. On the one hand, although IaC represents an ever-increasing widely adopted practice nowadays, still little is known concerning how to best maintain, speedily evolve, and continuously improve the code behind the IaC practice in a measurable fashion. On the other hand, source code measurements are often computed and analyzed to evaluate the different quality aspects of the software developed. However, unlike general-purpose programming languages (GPLs), IaC scripts use domain-specific languages, and metrics used for GPLs may not be applicable for IaC scripts. This article proposes a catalogue consisting of 46 metrics to identify IaC properties focusing on Ansible, one of the most popular IaC language to date, and shows how they can be used to analyze IaC scripts.
Empirical Standards are natural-language models of a scientific communitys expectations for a specific kind of study (e.g. a questionnaire survey). The ACM SIGSOFT Paper and Peer Review Quality Initiative generated empirical standards for research methods commonly used in software engineering. These living documents, which should be continuously revised to reflect evolving consensus around research best practices, will improve research quality and make peer review more effective, reliable, transparent and fair.
Statistical analysis is the tool of choice to turn data into information, and then information into empirical knowledge. To be valid, the process that goes from data to knowledge should be supported by detailed, rigorous guidelines, which help ferret out issues with the data or model, and lead to qualified results that strike a reasonable balance between generality and practical relevance. Such guidelines are being developed by statisticians to support the latest techniques for Bayesian data analysis. In this article, we frame these guidelines in a way that is apt to empirical research in software engineering. To demonstrate the guidelines in practice, we apply them to reanalyze a GitHub dataset about code quality in different programming languages. The datasets original analysis (Ray et al., 2014) and a critical reanalysis (Berger at al., 2019) have attracted considerable attention -- in no small part because they target a topic (the impact of different programming languages) on which strong opinions abound. The goals of our reanalysis are largely orthogonal to this previous work, as we are concerned with demonstrating, on data in an interesting domain, how to build a principled Bayesian data analysis and to showcase some of its benefits. In the process, we will also shed light on some critical aspects of the analyzed data and of the relationship between programming languages and code quality. The high-level conclusions of our exercise will be that Bayesian statistical techniques can be applied to analyze software engineering data in a way that is principled, flexible, and leads to convincing results that inform the state of the art while highlighting the boundaries of its validity. The guidelines can support building solid statistical analyses and connecting their results, and hence help buttress continued progress in empirical software engineering research.
We explore the applicability of Graph Neural Networks in learning the nuances of source code from a security perspective. Specifically, whether signatures of vulnerabilities in source code can be learned from its graph representation, in terms of relationships between nodes and edges. We create a pipeline we call AI4VA, which first encodes a sample source code into a Code Property Graph. The extracted graph is then vectorized in a manner which preserves its semantic information. A Gated Graph Neural Network is then trained using several such graphs to automatically extract templates differentiating the graph of a vulnerable sample from a healthy one. Our model outperforms static analyzers, classic machine learning, as well as CNN and RNN-based deep learning models on two of the three datasets we experiment with. We thus show that a code-as-graph encoding is more meaningful for vulnerability detection than existing code-as-photo and linear sequence encoding approaches. (Submitted Oct 2019, Paper #28, ICST)
[Context] Open Source Software (OSS) is nowadays used and integrated in most of the commercial products. However, the selection of OSS projects for integration is not a simple process, mainly due to a of lack of clear selection models and lack of information from the OSS portals. [Objective] We investigated the current factors and measures that practitioners are currently considering when selecting OSS, the source of information and portals that can be used to assess the factors, and the possibility to automatically get this information with APIs. [Method] We elicited the factors and the measures adopted to assess and compare OSS performing a survey among 23 experienced developers who often integrate OSS in the software they develop. Moreover, we investigated the APIs of the portals adopted to assess OSS extracting information for the most starred 100K projects in GitHub. [Result] We identified a set consisting of 8 main factors and 74 sub-factors, together with 170 related metrics that companies can use to select OSS to be integrated in their software projects. Unexpectedly, only a small part of the factors can be evaluated automatically, and out of 170 metrics, only 40 are available, of which only 22 returned information for all the 100K projects. [Conclusion.] OSS selection can be partially automated, by extracting the information needed for the selection from portal APIs. OSS producers can benefit from our results by checking if they are providing all the information commonly required by potential adopters. Developers can benefit from our results, using the list of factors we selected as a checklist during the selection of OSS, or using the APIs we developed to automatically extract the data from OSS projects.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
