Download to read offline
![Motivation
Many studies have investigated the
impact of anti-patterns on
• Maintenance [Yamashita, 2013]
• Fault-proneness [Khomh, 2012]
• Change-proneness [Romano, 2012]
-----
4](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/wcre2013-antipatterns-final-version-131016144044-phpapp02/85/Mining-the-Relationship-between-Anti-patterns-Dependencies-and-Fault-Proneness-4-320.jpg)
Uploaded byFoutse Khomh
Mining the Relationship between Anti-patterns Dependencies and Fault-Proneness
The document investigates the relationship between anti-patterns in code and the fault-proneness of classes, revealing that classes with static relationships to anti-patterns are more likely to experience faults. The analysis compares fault rates between classes with and without these relationships, finding significant correlations, especially with anti-patterns such as 'blob' and 'complex class.' Overall, it suggests that anti-patterns can impact software quality despite not directly causing failures.
More Related Content
Similar to Mining the Relationship between Anti-patterns Dependencies and Fault-Proneness
![5G Explained! A High Level Overview [Introduction]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/5gexplainedahighleveloverview-260119165306-cc137a3e-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Mining the Relationship between Anti-patterns Dependencies and Fault-Proneness
- 1. Mining the Relationshipbetween Anti-patterns Dependencies and FaultProneness Fehmi Jaafar, Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc, Sylvie Hamel Foutse Khomh
- 2. Anti-patterns describe poorsolutions to design and implementation problems… …they are not technically incorrect and don't currently prevent the program from functioning. Instead, they indicate weaknesses in design that may be slowing down development or increasing the risk of bugs or failures in the future. 2
- 3. Examples of Anti-patterns Blob Largecontroller class, low cohesion, associated with simple, data-object classes… Spaghetti Code Process oriented methods, object methods with no parameters, class or global variables utilization, flow of execution dictated by object implementation, not by the clients of the objects. 3
- 4. Motivation Many studies haveinvestigated the impact of anti-patterns on • Maintenance [Yamashita, 2013] • Fault-proneness [Khomh, 2012] • Change-proneness [Romano, 2012] ----- 4
- 5. Motivation Yet, classes sharingstatic relationships with anti-patterns have been mostly ignored… We conjecture that, static and co-change relationships with anti-patterns can impact the fault-proneness of classes without anti-patterns. 5
- 6.
- 7. Data Collection Subject systems #Classes 3,325 1,615 1,191 # Snapshots 4,480 2,010 159,196 Anti-patterns detected with DECOR… • MessageChain • Antisingleton • RefusedParameterBequest • Blob • SpaghettiCode • ClassDataShouldBePrivate (CDSBP) • SpeculativeGenerality • ComplexClass • SwissArmyKnife • LazyClass • LongParameterList • LongMethod 7
- 8. Co-change and Staticrelationships with Antipatterns Anti-patterns Systems # of CC # of S.R Anti-patterns Systems # of CC # of S.R 48 244 8 196 188 16 183 51 304 47 326 36 164 6 183 24 93 25 93 4 167 0 0 0 82 0 0 0 113 0 0 2 192 13 128 0 146 4 139 0 96 8 201 42 282 20 69 51 314 9 142 0 266 18 108 12 344 0 276 0 309 13 Blob CDSBP ComplexClass LongMethod LongParameterList 20 201 18 Anti singleton 152 MessageChains RefusedParentBequest Spaghetti Code SpeculativeGenerality SwissArmyKnife
- 9.
- 10. Analysis Methods HRQ: Theproportions of faults carried by classes having static (resp. Cochange) relationships with anti-patterns and other classes are the same. 10
- 11. RQ1: Are classesthat have static relationships with anti-patterns more fault-prone than other classes? Faults No-Faults Odd Ratios Total of classes related to AP 1939 1350 2.22 Classes with S.R with AP and that are not AP. 945 778 1.88 Total of other classes 1117 1725 1 Classes with S.R with AP 1062 1003 Classes with S.R with AP and that are not AP 402 600 Other classes 681 579 Classes with S.R with AP 432 226 Classes with S.R with AP and that are not AP. 281 103 Other classes 310 647 Classes with S.R with AP 445 121 Classes with S.R with AP and that are not AP. 262 75 Other classes 126 499 P-value = 2.2 e-16
- 12. RQ2: Are classesthat co-change with anti-patterns more fault-prone than other classes? Faults No-Faults Odd Ratios Total of classes co-changing with AP 346 149 2.5 Classes co-changing with AP and that are not AP 173 81 2.3 Total of other classes 2710 2926 1 Classes co-changing with AP 241 102 Classes co-changing with AP and that are not AP 120 59 Other classes 1502 1480 Classes co-changing with AP 68 26 Classes co-changing with AP and that are not AP 33 10 Other classes 674 847 Classes co-changing with AP 37 21 Classes co-changing with AP and that are not AP 20 12 Other classes 534 599 P-value = 2.2 e-16
- 13. Some Observations Wefound no class having a static dependency (i.e. use, association, aggregation, and composition relationships) or that co-changed with a SpaghettiCode. We found that classes having static relationships with Blob, ComplexClass, and SwissArmyKnife are significantly more fault prone than other classes with similar complexity, change history, and code size. Many anti-patterns’ relationships were with classes playing roles in design patterns. Classes that are co-changing with anti-patterns classes are significantly more fault prone than other classes with similar complexity, change history, and code size. 13
- 14.