An analysis of errors in a reuse-oriented development environment

Thomas, William M.; Delis, Alex; Basili, Victor R.

doi:10.1016/s0164-1212(96)00152-5

Cited by 22 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Phase 2 would cover more specific products but at the time of publication, Phase 2 was still under planning and the savings were so far only estimated in the paper. The final list therefore includes the following eleven papers ordered here after the year of publication: , (Thomas et al, 1997), , , (Morisio et al, 2002), , (Mohagheghi et al, 2004) 1 , (Baldassarre et al, 2005), , (Selby, 2005), and (Zhang and Jarzabek, 2005).…”

Section: Paper Inclusion Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When a paper does not provide information on an attribute, the label "-" is used. The conclusions may be summarized as: − Study type: Thomas et al (1997) and Selby (2005) do not discuss the study type. For the others, we have shown the study type both from the authors' and the review's perspective.…”

Section: Objects Types Of Studies Scale Publication Channel and Yearmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The term "case study" is often used in literature to cover all studies where some data on "cases" are presented. The review has identified four case studies (Thomas et al, 1997) (Mohagheghi et al, 2004) (Baldassarre et al, 2005) (Selby, 2005), three exploratory case studies ) 2 (Morisio et al, 2002), three experience reports (Zhang and Jarzabek, 2005), and one example application Succi et al (2001) and Tomer et al (2004) have not reported programming language, and four of the papers (Baldassarre et al, 2005) (Zhang and Jarzabek, 2005) have not reported the size of products or the reusable assets, where in (Zhang and Jarzabek, 2005) it is not clear whether 4.5 KLOC is the total size or the mean size of applications. There is variation in domain and programming languages.…”

Section: Objects Types Of Studies Scale Publication Channel and Yearmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…− Medium-scale studies (M): Three studies ) (Baldassarre et al, 2005) cover larger products than the first group but less or around 100 KLOC, and still the objects of study are few. − Large-scale studies (L): Three studies (Thomas et al, 1997) (Mohagheghi et al, 2004) (Selby, 2005) cover products with software size more than 100 KLOC or cover a large number of objects.…”

Section: Objects Types Of Studies Scale Publication Channel and Yearmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…-Compositional: ) and ; -Reuse of templates: (Baldassarre et al, 2005); -Reuse of software modules or components: (Thomas et al, 1997), , Morad and Kuflik (2005) and (Selby, 2005); -OO frameworks: (Morisio et al, 2002); -Domain engineering: (Mohagheghi et al, 2004) with a layered software architecture, and (Zhang and Jarzabek, 2005) with metacomponents; -Component-based reuse: (Mohagheghi et al, 2004); -Generative programming: none;…”

Section: Technical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Quality, productivity and economic benefits of software reuse: a review of industrial studies

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Systematic software reuse is proposed to increase productivity and software quality and lead to economic benefits. Reports of successful software reuse programs in industry have been published. However, there has been little effort to organize the evidence systematically and appraise it. This review aims to assess the effects of software reuse in industrial contexts. Journals and major conferences between 1994 and 2005 were searched to find observational studies and experiments conducted in industry, returning eleven papers of observational type. Systematic software reuse is significantly related to lower problem (defect, fault or error) density in five studies and to decreased effort spent on correcting problems in three studies. The review found evidence for significant gains in apparent productivity in three studies. Other significant benefits of software reuse were reported in single studies or the results were inconsistent. Evidence from industry is sparse and combining results was done by votecounting. Researchers should pay more attention to using comparable metrics, performing longitudinal studies, and explaining the results and impact on industry.

show abstract

Section: Paper Inclusion Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Objects Types Of Studies Scale Publication Channel and Yearmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Objects Types Of Studies Scale Publication Channel and Yearmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Objects Types Of Studies Scale Publication Channel and Yearmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Technical Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Quality, productivity and economic benefits of software reuse: a review of industrial studies

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Assessment and cross-product prediction of software product line quality: accounting for reuse across products, over multiple releases

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goals of cross-product reuse in a software product line (SPL) are to mitigate production costs and improve the quality. In addition to reuse across products, due to the evolutionary development process, a SPL also exhibits reuse across releases. In this paper, we empirically explore how the two types of reuse-reuse across products and reuse across releases-affect the quality of a SPL and our ability to accurately predict fault proneness. We measure the quality in terms of post-release faults and consider different levels of reuse across products (i.e., common, high-reuse variation, low-reuse variation, and single-use packages), over multiple releases. Assessment results showed that quality improved for common, low-reuse variation, and single-use packages as they evolved across releases. Surprisingly, within each release, among preexisting ('old') packages, the cross-product reuse did not affect the change and fault proneness. Cross-product predictions based on pre-release data accurately ranked the packages according to their post-release faults and predicted the 20 % most faulty packages. The predictions benefited from data available for other products in the product line, with models producing better results (1) when making predictions on smaller products (consisting mostly of common packages) rather than on larger products and (2) when trained on larger products rather than on smaller products.

show abstract

A case study comparing defect profiles of a reused framework and of applications reusing it

Gupta

Conradi

et al. 2008

Empir Software Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The benefits of software reuse have been studied for many years. Several previous studies have observed that reused software has a lower defect density than newly built software. However, few studies have investigated empirically the reasons for this phenomenon. To date, we have only the common sense observation that as software is reused over time, the fixed defects will accumulate and will result in high-quality software. This paper reports on an industrial case study in a large Norwegian Oil and Gas company, involving a reused Java class framework and two applications that use that framework. We analyzed all trouble reports from the use of the framework and the applications according to the Orthogonal Defect Classification (ODC), followed by a qualitative Root Cause Analysis (RCA). The results reveal that the framework has a much lower defect density in total than one application and a slightly higher defect density than the other. In addition, the defect densities of the most severe defects of the reused framework are similar to those of the applications that are reusing it. The results of the ODC and RCA analyses reveal that systematic reuse (i.e. clearly defined and stable requirements, better design, hesitance to change, and solid testing) lead to lower defect densities of the functional-type defects in the reused framework than in applications that are reusing it. However, the different "nature" of the framework and the applications (e.g. interaction with other software, number and complexity of business logic, and functionality of the software) may confound the causal relationship between systematic reuse and the lower defect density of the reused software. Using the results of the study as a basis, we present an improved overall cause-effect model between systematic reuse and lower defect density that will facilitate further studies and implementations of software reuse.

show abstract

An analysis of errors in a reuse-oriented development environment

Cited by 22 publications

References 16 publications

Quality, productivity and economic benefits of software reuse: a review of industrial studies

Quality, productivity and economic benefits of software reuse: a review of industrial studies

Assessment and cross-product prediction of software product line quality: accounting for reuse across products, over multiple releases

A case study comparing defect profiles of a reused framework and of applications reusing it

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About