15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension (ICPC '07) 2007
DOI: 10.1109/icpc.2007.33
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reducing Program Comprehension Effort in Evolving Software by Recognizing Feature Implementation Convergence

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The association graph matching similarity measure (AGM) introduced by Kothari et al (Kothari et al 2006) is a measure of pair-wise similarity between features based on dynamic call graphs. It has been used to find canonical feature sets (Kothari et al 2006), feature version similarity (Kothari et al 2008), and feature implementation overlap (Kothari et al 2007). …”
Section: Dynamic Coupling Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The association graph matching similarity measure (AGM) introduced by Kothari et al (Kothari et al 2006) is a measure of pair-wise similarity between features based on dynamic call graphs. It has been used to find canonical feature sets (Kothari et al 2006), feature version similarity (Kothari et al 2008), and feature implementation overlap (Kothari et al 2007). …”
Section: Dynamic Coupling Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Structural approaches include [4,11]. Textual approaches utilize such techniques as information retrieval [14,16], independent component analysis [9], and natural language [20].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These approaches have focused on how programmers develop features [94], a feature-centric environment for source code browsing [188], identifying canonical sets of features [120,121,119], reverse engineering [91], and identifying and refactoring features that need evolution [149]. Our work focuses on locating features' implementations and on determining the relationships between features using coupling.…”
Section: Scope Of This Dissertationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Structural approaches [13,39,121,179,176] explore the relationships among classes, methods, and other program elements to locate features. We did not explore a purely structural feature location technique in this work due to the fact that the other approaches we studied ranked methods, and obtaining a ranking from only structural information is difficult.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%