Advertisement

Measuring the Impact of Different Categories of Software Evolution

  • Francesca Longo
  • Roberto Tiella
  • Paolo Tonella
  • Adolfo Villafiorita
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5338)

Abstract

Software evolution involves different categories of interventions, having variable impact on the code. Knowledge about the expected impact of an intervention is fundamental for project planning and resource allocation. Moreover, deviations from the expected impact may hint for areas of the system having a poor design. In this paper, we investigate the relationship between evolution categories and impacted code by means of a set of metrics computed over time for a subject system.

Keywords

Software Evolution Evolution Category Corrective Evolution Life Cycle Process Software Life Cycle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Caporusso, L., Buzzi, C., Fele, G., Bertoli, P., Sartori, F.: Transitioning to Electronic Voting and Citizen Participation. In: Krimmer, R. (ed.) Proceedings of Electronic Voting 2006 Conference, pp. 191–200 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chidamber, S.R., Kemerer, C.F.: A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 20(6) (June 1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fowler, M.: Refactoring: improving the design of existing code. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gamma, J., Erich, R., Helm, V., Richard, J.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO/IEC 14764. Software Engineering Software Life Cycle Processes MaintenanceGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    JavaNCSS A Source Measurement Suite for Java, http://www.kclee.de/clemens/java/javancss/
  7. 7.
    Mercuri, R.: Explanation of voter-verified ballot systems. ACM Software Engineering Notes (SIGSOFT) 27(5), http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.17.html
  8. 8.
    Mercuri, R.: A better ballot box? IEEE Spectrum Online (October 2002) http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/publicfeature/oct02/evot.html
  9. 9.
    Reenskaug, T.: Thing-Model-View Editor an Example from a planning system, Xerox Parc Technical Note (May 1979), http://heim.ifi.uio.no/trygver/1979/mvc-2/1979-12-MVC.pdf
  10. 10.
    Tiella, R., Villafiorita, A., Tomasi, S.: FSMC+, a tool for the generation of Java code from statecharts. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Principles and practices of programming in Java (PPPJ 2007), pp. 93–102. ACM, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesca Longo
    • 1
  • Roberto Tiella
    • 1
  • Paolo Tonella
    • 1
  • Adolfo Villafiorita
    • 1
  1. 1.Fondazione Bruno Kessler IRSTTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations