WizardMerge -- Save Us From Merging Without Any Clues

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02818v1
• Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 05:40:29 GMT
• Title: WizardMerge -- Save Us From Merging Without Any Clues
• Authors: Qingyu Zhang, Junzhe Li, Jiayi Lin, Jie Ding, Lanteng Lin, Chenxiong Qian,
• Abstract summary: We present WizardMerge, an auxiliary tool that leverages merging results from Git to retrieve code block dependency on text and LLVM-IR level. The outcomes demonstrate that WizardMerge diminishes conflict merging time costs, achieving a 23.85% reduction.
• Score: 8.21089093466603
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Modern software development necessitates efficient version-oriented collaboration among developers. While Git is the most popular version control system, it generates unsatisfactory version merging results due to textual-based workflow, leading to potentially unexpected results in the merged version of the project. Although numerous merging tools have been proposed for improving merge results, developers remain struggling to resolve the conflicts and fix incorrectly modified code without clues. We present WizardMerge, an auxiliary tool that leverages merging results from Git to retrieve code block dependency on text and LLVM-IR level and provide suggestions for developers to resolve errors introduced by textual merging. Through the evaluation, we subjected WizardMerge to testing on 227 conflicts within five large-scale projects. The outcomes demonstrate that WizardMerge diminishes conflict merging time costs, achieving a 23.85% reduction. Beyond addressing conflicts, WizardMerge provides merging suggestions for over 70% of the code blocks potentially affected by the conflicts. Notably, WizardMerge exhibits the capability to identify conflict-unrelated code blocks that require manual intervention yet are harmfully applied by Git during the merging.

Related papers

• Evaluation of Version Control Merge Tools [3.1969855247377836]
  A version control system, such as Git, requires a way to integrate changes from different developers or branches. A merge tool either outputs a clean integration of the changes, or it outputs a conflict for manual resolution. New merge tools have been proposed, but they have not yet been evaluated against one another.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-13T17:35:14Z)
• LLM$\times$MapReduce: Simplified Long-Sequence Processing using Large Language Models [73.13933847198395]
  We propose a training-free framework for processing long texts, utilizing a divide-and-conquer strategy to achieve comprehensive document understanding. The proposed LLM$times$MapReduce framework splits the entire document into several chunks for LLMs to read and then aggregates the intermediate answers to produce the final output.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-12T03:13:44Z)
• CONGRA: Benchmarking Automatic Conflict Resolution [3.9910625211670485]
  ConGra is a benchmarking scheme designed to evaluate the performance of software merging tools. We build a large-scale evaluation dataset based on 44,948 conflicts from 34 real-world projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-21T12:21:41Z)
• MAGIS: LLM-Based Multi-Agent Framework for GitHub Issue Resolution [47.850418420195304]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in code generation but face difficulties in resolving GitHub issues. We propose a novel Multi-Agent framework for GitHub Issue reSolution, MAGIS, consisting of four agents customized for software evolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-26T17:57:57Z)
• GitAgent: Facilitating Autonomous Agent with GitHub by Tool Extension [81.44231422624055]
  A growing area of research focuses on Large Language Models (LLMs) equipped with external tools capable of performing diverse tasks. In this paper, we introduce GitAgent, an agent capable of achieving the autonomous tool extension from GitHub.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-28T15:47:30Z)
• ControlLLM: Augment Language Models with Tools by Searching on Graphs [97.62758830255002]
  We present ControlLLM, a novel framework that enables large language models (LLMs) to utilize multi-modal tools for solving real-world tasks. Our framework comprises three key components: (1) a textittask decomposer that breaks down a complex task into clear subtasks with well-defined inputs and outputs; (2) a textitThoughts-on-Graph (ToG) paradigm that searches the optimal solution path on a pre-built tool graph; and (3) an textitexecution engine with a rich toolbox that interprets the solution path and runs the
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T21:57:21Z)
• Detecting Semantic Conflicts with Unit Tests [5.273883263686449]
  Branching and merging are common practices in software development, increasing developer's productivity. Modern merge techniques can resolve textual conflicts automatically, but they fail when the conflict arises at the semantic level. We proposeSemAntic Merge, a semantic merge tool based on the automated generation of unit tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T19:36:28Z)
• 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)
• Using Developer Discussions to Guide Fixing Bugs in Software [51.00904399653609]
  We propose using bug report discussions, which are available before the task is performed and are also naturally occurring, avoiding the need for additional information from developers. We demonstrate that various forms of natural language context derived from such discussions can aid bug-fixing, even leading to improved performance over using commit messages corresponding to the oracle bug-fixing commits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-11T16:37:33Z)
• ConE: A Concurrent Edit Detection Tool for Large ScaleSoftware Development [16.11297015618479]
  ConE proactively detects concurrent edits to help mitigate the problems caused by them. We present the results of ConE's deployment through early intervention techniques such as pull request notifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-16T22:55:44Z)

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.