Proceedings of the XXXIV Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering 2020
DOI: 10.1145/3422392.3422428
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Metadata Handling API for Framework Development

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
15
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
1

Relationship

3
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, a third researcher inspected the classification. Our findings aim to complement results from the literature (Guerra and Fernandes, 2013;Guerra et al, 2020), understanding the rationale for preferring or not annotations.…”
Section: Survey Recruitment and Analysismentioning
confidence: 51%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Finally, a third researcher inspected the classification. Our findings aim to complement results from the literature (Guerra and Fernandes, 2013;Guerra et al, 2020), understanding the rationale for preferring or not annotations.…”
Section: Survey Recruitment and Analysismentioning
confidence: 51%
“…However, we also recognize that readability is very subjective, and the participants could consider anything in their judgment. So, this qualitative analysis adds to the current literature (Guerra and Fernandes, 2013;Guerra et al, 2020) by bringing some additional information from spontaneous manifestations of the participants about the readability of annotated code, being their reasons directed related to readability or not.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In a recent experiment about framework development, we compared the usage of an annotation-based API to another based on object-orientation for metadata reading [19]. The results showed a more consistent behavior in the evolution of coupling and complexity metrics when using the annotation-based approach, but they did not find significant differences in productivity.…”
Section: Annotation Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 95%