Precise Version Control of Trees with Line-Based Version Control Systems

Asenov, Dimitar; Guenat, Balz; Müller, Péter; Otth, Martin

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-54494-5_9

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless, to confirm this, we performed a parallel load for EMF Compare and DiffMerge for the conflict models of scenario 1, and the results are shown in Fig. 25. We can see that the parallel execution achieved a 16% average reduction for EMF DiffMerge, while for EMF Compare the reduction was slightly larger at 22%.…”

Section: Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 58%

An efficient line-based approach for resolving merge conflicts in XMI-based models

Vega

Kolovos

2022

Softw Syst Model

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conflicts in software artefacts can appear during collaborative development through version control systems. When these conflicts happen in XMI models, the conflict sections generated by diff programs break the XMI serialisation and compromise the ability to use model editors that assume well-formedness of this serialisation. While these conflict sections already mark the conflicting lines of the model, current tools for conflict resolution in models ignore them and instead load the different versions of a model from the repository, over which they perform a full and costly comparison that re-identifies the conflicts. We present a novel approach that prevents this repetition of work by directly parsing XMI-based models with conflict sections, which allows for a targeted analysis of only the lines of the model that have been detected to be in conflict by the version control system. We have implemented this approach in the Peacemaker tool, which can load XMI models with conflict sections, compute and display conflicts at the model level, and provide appropriate resolution actions. Compared with state-of-the-art model comparison tools with support for conflict resolution, Peacemaker is able to identify the vast majority of conflicts in models while reducing the required time by up to 60%. The small subset of non-identified conflicts does not introduce issues into the models, e.g. there is no loss of model information, and the resulting models after line-merging these conflicts conform to their metamodels.

show abstract

Section: Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 58%

An efficient line-based approach for resolving merge conflicts in XMI-based models

Vega

Kolovos

2022

Softw Syst Model

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While Unix diff explains which lines changed, truediff explains how two files changed structurally. Asenov et al [2] show that it is possible to produce structural patches with Unix diff by preparing the source file to contain a single AST node per line. The output of Unix diff then essentially describes AST node insertions and deletions.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concise, type-safe, and efficient structural diffing

Erdweg¹,

Szabó²,

Pacak³

2021

Proceedings of the 42nd ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A structural diffing algorithm compares two pieces of treeshaped data and computes their difference. Existing structural diffing algorithms either produce concise patches or ensure type safety, but never both. We present a new structural diffing algorithm called truediff that achieves both properties by treating subtrees as mutable, yet linearly typed resources. Mutation is required to derive concise patches that only mention changed nodes, but, in contrast to prior work, truediff guarantees all intermediate trees are well-typed. We formalize type safety, prove truediff has linear run time, and evaluate its performance and the conciseness of the derived patches empirically for real-world Python documents. While truediff ensures type safety, the size of its patches is on par with Gumtree, a popular untyped diffing implementation. Regardless, truediff outperforms Gumtree and a typed diffing implementation by an order of magnitude.CCS Concepts: • Software and its engineering → Software notations and tools.

show abstract

“…Version control of trees [2] presents everywhere in software development; generally it is solved by serializing the tree, not via methods operating on the tree itself.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Version Controlling in RefactorErl

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Static source code analyser tools are operating on an intermediate representation of the source code that is usually a tree or a graph. Those representations need to be updated according to the different versions of the source code. However, the developers might be interested in the changes or might need information about previous versions, therefore, keeping different versions of the source code analysed by the tools are required. RefactorErl is an open-source static analysis and transformation tool for Erlang that uses a graph representation to store and manipulate the source code. The aim of our research was to create an extension of the Semantic Program Graph of RefactorErl that is able to store different versions of the source code in a single graph. The new method resulted in 30% memory footprint decrease compared to the available workaround solutions.

show abstract

Precise Version Control of Trees with Line-Based Version Control Systems

Cited by 12 publications

References 28 publications

An efficient line-based approach for resolving merge conflicts in XMI-based models

An efficient line-based approach for resolving merge conflicts in XMI-based models

Concise, type-safe, and efficient structural diffing

Towards Version Controlling in RefactorErl

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About