ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Static bug finders have been widely-adopted by developers to find bugs in real world software projects. They leverage predefined heuristic static analysis rules to scan source code or binary code of a software project, and report violations to these rules as warnings to be verified. However, the advantages of static bug finders are overshadowed by such issues as uncovered obvious bugs, false positives, etc. To improve these tools, many techniques have been proposed to filter out false positives reported or design new static analysis rules. Nevertheless, the under-performance of bug finders can also be caused by the incorrectness of current rules contained in the static bug finders, which is not explored yet. In this work, we propose a differential testing approach to detect bugs in the rules of four widely-used static bug finders, i.e., SonarQube, PMD, SpotBugs, and ErrorProne, and conduct a qualitative study about the bugs found. To retrieve paired rules across static bug finders for differential testing, we design a heuristic-based rule mapping method which combines the similarity in rules description and the overlap in warning information reported by the tools. The experiment on 2,728 open source projects reveals 46 bugs in the static bug finders, among which 24 are fixed or confirmed and the left are awaiting confirmation. We also summarize 13 bug patterns in the static analysis rules based on their context and root causes, which can serve as the checklist for designing and implementing other rules and or in other tools. This study indicates that the commonly-used static bug finders are not as reliable as they might have been envisaged. It not only demonstrates the effectiveness of our approach, but also highlights the need to continue improving the reliability of the static bug finders.
Open source projects often maintain open bug repositories during development and maintenance, and the reporters often point out straightly or implicitly the reasons why bugs occur when they submit them. The comments about a bug are very valuable for
Bug patterns are erroneous code idioms or bad coding practices that have been proved to fail time and time again, which are usually caused by the misunderstanding of a programming languages features, the use of erroneous design patterns, or simple mi
Numerous efforts have been invested in improving the effectiveness of bug localization techniques, whereas little attention is paid to making these tools run more efficiently in continuously evolving software repositories. This paper first analyzes t
Hybrid testing combines fuzz testing and concolic execution. It leverages fuzz testing to test easy-to-reach code regions and uses concolic execution to explore code blocks guarded by complex branch conditions. However, its code coverage-centric desi
Background: Performance bugs can lead to severe issues regarding computation efficiency, power consumption, and user experience. Locating these bugs is a difficult task because developers have to judge for every costly operation whether runtime is co