Empirical Evaluation of a Live Environment for Extract Method Refactoring

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.11010v1
• Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 16:36:02 GMT
• Title: Empirical Evaluation of a Live Environment for Extract Method Refactoring
• Authors: Sara Fernandes, Ademar Aguiar, Andr\'e Restivo
• Abstract summary: We developed a Live Refactoring Environment that visually identifies, recommends, and applies Extract Methods. Our results were significantly different and better than the ones from the code manually without further help.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Complex software can be hard to read, adapt, and maintain. Refactoring it can create cleaner and self-explanatory code. Refactoring tools try to guide developers towards better code, with more quality. However, most of them take too long to provide feedback, support, and guidance on how developers should improve their software. To reduce this problem, we explored the concept of Live Refactoring, focusing on visually suggesting and applying refactorings, in real-time. With this in mind, we developed a Live Refactoring Environment that visually identifies, recommends, and applies Extract Method refactorings. To validate it, we conducted an empirical experiment. Early results showed that our approach improved several code quality metrics. Besides, we also concluded that our results were significantly different and better than the ones from refactoring the code manually without further help.

Related papers

• Understanding Code Understandability Improvements in Code Reviews [79.16476505761582]
  We analyzed 2,401 code review comments from Java open-source projects on GitHub. 83.9% of suggestions for improvement were accepted and integrated, with fewer than 1% later reverted.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T12:21:23Z)
• DOCE: Finding the Sweet Spot for Execution-Based Code Generation [69.5305729627198]
  We propose a comprehensive framework that includes candidate generation, $n$-best reranking, minimum Bayes risk (MBR) decoding, and self-ging as the core components. Our findings highlight the importance of execution-based methods and the difference gap between execution-based and execution-free methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-25T07:10:36Z)
• In Search of Metrics to Guide Developer-Based Refactoring Recommendations [13.063733696956678]
  Motivation is a well-established approach to improving source code quality without compromising its external behavior. We propose an empirical study into the metrics that study the developer's willingness to apply operations. We will quantify the value of product and process metrics in grasping developers' motivations to perform.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-25T16:32:35Z)
• Insights into Deep Learning Refactoring: Bridging the Gap Between Practices and Expectations [13.084553746852382]
  Deep learning software has become progressively complex as the software evolves. The insight of code in the context of deep learning is still unclear. Research and the development of related tools are crucial for improving project maintainability and code quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-08T07:35:14Z)
• ReGAL: Refactoring Programs to Discover Generalizable Abstractions [59.05769810380928]
  Generalizable Abstraction Learning (ReGAL) is a method for learning a library of reusable functions via codeization. We find that the shared function libraries discovered by ReGAL make programs easier to predict across diverse domains. For CodeLlama-13B, ReGAL results in absolute accuracy increases of 11.5% on LOGO, 26.1% on date understanding, and 8.1% on TextCraft, outperforming GPT-3.5 in two of three domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T18:45:30Z)
• Fixing Your Own Smells: Adding a Mistake-Based Familiarisation Step When Teaching Code Refactoring [2.021502591596062]
  Students must first complete a programming exercise to ensure they will produce a code smell. This simple intervention is based on the idea that learning is easier if students are familiar with the code. We conducted a study with 35 novice undergraduates in which they completed various exercises alternately taught using a traditional and our'mistake-based' approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-02T03:39:19Z)
• Automating Source Code Refactoring in the Classroom [15.194527511076725]
  This paper discusses the results of an experiment in the that involved carrying out various classroom activities for the purpose of removing antipatterns using Jodorant, an Eclipse plugin that supports antipatterns detection and correction. The results of the quantitative and qualitative analysis with 171 students show that students tend to appreciate the idea of learning, and are satisfied with various aspects of the JDeodorant plugin's operation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-05T18:46:00Z)
• Do code refactorings influence the merge effort? [80.1936417993664]
  Multiple contributors frequently change the source code in parallel to implement new features, fix bugs, existing code, and make other changes. These simultaneous changes need to be merged into the same version of the source code. Studies show that 10 to 20 percent of all merge attempts result in conflicts, which require the manual developer's intervention to complete the process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-10T13:24:59Z)
• RepoCoder: Repository-Level Code Completion Through Iterative Retrieval and Generation [96.75695811963242]
  RepoCoder is a framework to streamline the repository-level code completion process. It incorporates a similarity-based retriever and a pre-trained code language model. It consistently outperforms the vanilla retrieval-augmented code completion approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-22T13:54:46Z)
• ReACC: A Retrieval-Augmented Code Completion Framework [53.49707123661763]
  We propose a retrieval-augmented code completion framework, leveraging both lexical copying and referring to code with similar semantics by retrieval. We evaluate our approach in the code completion task in Python and Java programming languages, achieving a state-of-the-art performance on CodeXGLUE benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-15T08:25:08Z)
• How We Refactor and How We Document it? On the Use of Supervised Machine Learning Algorithms to Classify Refactoring Documentation [25.626914797750487]
  Refactoring is the art of improving the design of a system without altering its external behavior. This study categorizes commits into 3 categories, namely, Internal QA, External QA, and Code Smell Resolution, along with the traditional BugFix and Functional categories. To better understand our classification results, we analyzed commit messages to extract patterns that developers regularly use to describe their smells.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-26T20:33:17Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.