Does Code Review Speed Matter for Practitioners?
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2311.02489v1
- Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2023 19:22:23 GMT
- Title: Does Code Review Speed Matter for Practitioners?
- Authors: Gunnar Kudrjavets (University of Groningen) and Ayushi Rastogi
(University of Groningen)
- Abstract summary: Increasing code velocity is a common goal for a variety of software projects.
We conducted a survey to study the code velocity-related beliefs and practices in place.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Increasing code velocity is a common goal for a variety of software projects.
The efficiency of the code review process significantly impacts how fast the
code gets merged into the final product and reaches the customers. We conducted
a survey to study the code velocity-related beliefs and practices in place. We
analyzed 75 completed surveys from 39 participants from the industry and 36
from the open-source community. Our critical findings are (a) the industry and
open-source community hold a similar set of beliefs, (b) quick reaction time is
of utmost importance and applies to the tooling infrastructure and the behavior
of other engineers, (c) time-to-merge is the essential code review metric to
improve, (d) engineers have differing opinions about the benefits of increased
code velocity for their career growth, and (e) the controlled application of
the commit-then-review model can increase code velocity. Our study supports the
continued need to invest in and improve code velocity regardless of the
underlying organizational ecosystem.
Related papers
- What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions.
We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types.
We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z) - A Study on Developer Behaviors for Validating and Repairing LLM-Generated Code Using Eye Tracking and IDE Actions [13.58143103712]
GitHub Copilot is a large language model (LLM)-powered code generation tool.
This paper investigates how developers validate and repair code generated by Copilot.
Being aware of the code's provenance led to improved performance, increased search efforts, more frequent Copilot usage, and higher cognitive workload.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-25T06:20:01Z) - How far are AI-powered programming assistants from meeting developers' needs? [17.77734978425295]
In-IDE AI coding assistant tools (ACATs) like GitHub Copilot have significantly impacted developers' coding habits.
We simulate real development scenarios and recruit 27 computer science students to investigate their behavior with three popular ACATs.
We find that ACATs generally enhance task completion rates, reduce time, improve code quality, and increase self-perceived productivity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-18T08:51:14Z) - Code Prompting Elicits Conditional Reasoning Abilities in Text+Code LLMs [69.99031792995348]
We introduce code prompting, a chain of prompts that transforms a natural language problem into code.
We find that code prompting exhibits a high-performance boost for multiple LLMs.
Our analysis of GPT 3.5 reveals that the code formatting of the input problem is essential for performance improvement.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-18T15:32:24Z) - Collaborative, Code-Proximal Dynamic Software Visualization within Code
Editors [55.57032418885258]
This paper introduces the design and proof-of-concept implementation for a software visualization approach that can be embedded into code editors.
Our contribution differs from related work in that we use dynamic analysis of a software system's runtime behavior.
Our visualization approach enhances common remote pair programming tools and is collaboratively usable by employing shared code cities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-30T06:35:40Z) - CodeReviewer: Pre-Training for Automating Code Review Activities [36.40557768557425]
This research focuses on utilizing pre-training techniques for the tasks in the code review scenario.
We collect a large-scale dataset of real world code changes and code reviews from open-source projects in nine of the most popular programming languages.
To better understand code diffs and reviews, we propose CodeReviewer, a pre-trained model that utilizes four pre-training tasks tailored specifically for the code review senario.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-03-17T05:40:13Z) - 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) - DeSkew-LSH based Code-to-Code Recommendation Engine [3.7011129410662558]
We present emphSenatus, a new code-to-code recommendation engine for machine learning on source code.
At the core of Senatus is emphDe-Skew LSH, a new locality sensitive hashing algorithm that indexes the data for fast (sub-linear time) retrieval.
We show Senatus improves performance by 6.7% F1 and query time 16x is faster compared to Facebook Aroma on the task of code-to-code recommendation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-11-05T16:56:28Z) - Predicting Code Review Completion Time in Modern Code Review [12.696276129130332]
Modern Code Review (MCR) is being adopted in both open source and commercial projects as a common practice.
Code reviews can experience significant delays to be completed due to various socio-technical factors.
There is a lack of tool support to help developers estimating the time required to complete a code review.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-09-30T14:00:56Z) - COSEA: Convolutional Code Search with Layer-wise Attention [90.35777733464354]
We propose a new deep learning architecture, COSEA, which leverages convolutional neural networks with layer-wise attention to capture the code's intrinsic structural logic.
COSEA can achieve significant improvements over state-of-the-art methods on code search tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-19T13:53:38Z) - A Transformer-based Approach for Source Code Summarization [86.08359401867577]
We learn code representation for summarization by modeling the pairwise relationship between code tokens.
We show that despite the approach is simple, it outperforms the state-of-the-art techniques by a significant margin.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-01T23:29:36Z)
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.