1 / 25

Presented By : Abirami Poonkundran

Software Dependencies, Work Dependencies, and their impact on Failures Jeffrey A.Roberts , James D.Herbsleb , Marcelo cataldo and Audris Mockus. Presented By : Abirami Poonkundran. Concept. This paper is a case study on the impact of Syntactic Dependencies, Logical Dependencies and

tristana-kato
Download Presentation

Presented By : Abirami Poonkundran

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Software Dependencies, Work Dependencies, and their impact on FailuresJeffrey A.Roberts, James D.Herbsleb, Marcelo cataldo and AudrisMockus Presented By : AbiramiPoonkundran

  2. Concept • This paper is a case study on the impact of • Syntactic Dependencies, • Logical Dependencies and • Work Dependencies on a software development project, and identifies which dependencies have the higher impact on fault proneness

  3. Overview • Introduction • Software Dependencies • Syntactic Dependencies • Logical Dependencies • Work Dependencies • Data Collection • Measuring Failure • Results • Conclusion • Pro’s and Con’s

  4. Introduction • Research has shown that software faults are caused by violation of dependencies • Dependencies could be: • Software Dependencies • Technical • Caused by developers • Work Dependencies • Organizational • Caused by how work is organized • This paper examines the relative impact that each of these dependencies have on the fault proneness of the software system

  5. Software Dependencies • Software Dependencies could be: • Syntactic • Logical

  6. Syntactic Dependencies • Focuses on Control and Dataflow relationships • Dependencies are discovered by analysis of source code or from an intermediate representation like byte code or syntax trees • These dependencies could be: • Data Related Dependency - e.g., a particular data structure modified by a function and used in another function • Functional Dependency – e.g., Method A calls Method B

  7. Logical Dependencies • Dependencies between the source code files of a system that are changed together as part of software development • Often Logical Dependencies provide more valuable information than Syntactic Dependencies (eg., in Remote Procedure Calls) • They can identify important dependencies that are not visible in Syntactic Code analysis

  8. Work Dependencies • Only recent research have started shedding light on the impact of human and organizational factors on the failure proneness of software systems • Caused because of lack of proper communication and coordination between developers • Research have shown that identification and management of work dependencies is a major challenge

  9. Data Collection (1) • Examined two large software development projects: • Project A • Complex distributed system • Data are covered for 3 years of development activity • The company had 114 developers grouped into 8 development team and has 3 development locations • ≃ 5 million lines of code distributed in 7,737 source code files in C language

  10. Data Collection (2) • Project B: • Embedded software system • 40 developers in the project over a period of 5 years • 1.2 million lines of code were used in both C and C++ language

  11. Data Collection (3) • In both projects, every change to source code was controlled by Modification Requests (MR) • Every change made to Source code has to be committed to Version Control System • Information Used for this Analysis: • Collected a total of 8,257 and 3,372 MRs for Project A and Project B • Version control system from both projects • The source code itself from both projects

  12. Measuring Failure • Goal is to investigate failure proneness at the file level • File Buggyness– indicates whether a file has been modified in the course of resolving a defect

  13. Syntactic Dependencies • Used C-REX tool to identify programming language tokens and references in each entity of each source-code file • Source code snap shot was taken every quarter • Syntactic dependency analysis was done for each source code snapshot • Syntactic dependencies between source code file was identified by data, function and method references

  14. Logical Dependencies • Relate source-code files that are modified together as part of an MR • If only one file was changed for an MR, then there is no dependencies • Using the Commit information from the Version control system, a logical dependency matrix (LDM) was created • LDM is a symmetric matrix of source-code files where Cij represents the sum, across all releases, of the number of times files i and j were changed together as part of an MR

  15. Work Dependencies • Used two measures: • Workflow Dependencies • Captures the temporal aspects of the development effort • Two developers i and j are said to be interdependent if the MR was transferred from one developer i to developer j some point during that MR • Coordination Requirements • Captures the intradeveloper coordination requirements • Uses two matrix: • Task Assignment Matrix – Developer to file matrix • Task Dependency Matrix – File to file matrix

  16. Results • Analysis consists of two stages: • First Stage: Focus on examining the relative impact of each dependency type on failure proneness of source-code files • Second Stage: Verified the consistency of the initial results by conduction a number of confirmatory analysis • Constructed several logistic regression models

  17. Results

  18. Results

  19. Results • If Odds Ratio is larger than 1, then positive relationship between the independent and dependent variables • If Odds ratio less than 1, then negative relationship • Model 1: • Based on LOC and Average Lines Changed • LOC is positively associated with failure proneness • Average lines changed is also positively associated with defects

  20. Results • Model II: • Introduces Syntactic Dependency measures by: • Inflow Data • Has significant impact on error proneness • Inflow Functional • This type of syntactic dependency has less impact on failure pronenesss • Model III: • Higher number of logical dependencies related to an increase in the likelihood of failure

  21. Results • Model IV: • Workflow dependencies do increase the likelihood of defects • Model V: • Coordination requirement has an higher impact in Project A and lesser impact in Project B

  22. Conclusion • All dependencies increases fault proneness • Logical Dependencies has the highest impact, followed by Workflow dependencies and then Syntactic Dependencies

  23. Strength: • Analysis is based on data collection from 2 projects • Logical Dependencies has the highest impact when compared to other 2 dependencies Weakness: • Data collection from only 2 projects • They have not mentioned about other dependencies except software and work dependencies • Not provided a method to solve the errors for the dependencies

  24. Suggestions • Need to provided a method to solve the errors for the dependencies • Discussion about other dependencies • General concepts should be introduced

More Related