In Search of Metrics to Guide Developer-Based Refactoring Recommendations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.18169v1
• Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 16:32:35 GMT
• Title: In Search of Metrics to Guide Developer-Based Refactoring Recommendations
• Authors: Mikel Robredo, Matteo Esposito, Fabio Palomba, Rafael Peñaloza, Valentina Lenarduzzi,
• Abstract summary: 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.
• Score: 13.063733696956678
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Context. Source code refactoring is a well-established approach to improving source code quality without compromising its external behavior. Motivation. The literature described the benefits of refactoring, yet its application in practice is threatened by the high cost of time, resource allocation, and effort required to perform it continuously. Providing refactoring recommendations closer to what developers perceive as relevant may support the broader application of refactoring in practice and drive prioritization efforts. Aim. In this paper, we aim to foster the design of a developer-based refactoring recommender, proposing an empirical study into the metrics that study the developer's willingness to apply refactoring operations. We build upon previous work describing the developer's motivations for refactoring and investigate how product and process metrics may grasp those motivations. Expected Results. We will quantify the value of product and process metrics in grasping developers' motivations to perform refactoring, thus providing a catalog of metrics for developer-based refactoring recommenders to use.

Related papers

• 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)
• RaFe: Ranking Feedback Improves Query Rewriting for RAG [83.24385658573198]
  We propose a framework for training query rewriting models free of annotations. By leveraging a publicly available reranker, oursprovides feedback aligned well with the rewriting objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T11:00:19Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Empirical Evaluation of a Live Environment for Extract Method Refactoring [0.0]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T16:36:02Z)
• State of Refactoring Adoption: Better Understanding Developer Perception of Refactoring [5.516979718589074]
  We aim to explore how developers document their activities during the software life cycle. We call such activity Self-Affirmed Refactoring (SAR), which indicates developers' documentation of their activities. We propose an approach to identify whether a commit describes developer-related events to classify them according to the common quality improvement categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-09T16:38:20Z)
• RefBERT: A Two-Stage Pre-trained Framework for Automatic Rename Refactoring [57.8069006460087]
  We study automatic rename on variable names, which is considered more challenging than other rename activities. We propose RefBERT, a two-stage pre-trained framework for rename on variable names. We show that the generated variable names of RefBERT are more accurate and meaningful than those produced by the existing method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-28T12:29:39Z)
• 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)
• 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.