Semi-automatic update of applications in response to library changes

Chow,; Notkin,

doi:10.1109/icsm.1996.565039

Cited by 87 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Beyond empirical studies on APIs evolution, researchers have proposed several approaches to support API evolution and reduce the efforts of client developers. Chow and Notkin [39] present an approach where the API developers annotate changed methods with replacement rules that will be used to update client systems. Henkel and Diwan [40] propose CatchUp!, a tool using an IDE to capture and replay refactorings related to the API evolution.…”

Section: Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Reaction to Deprecation of 25,357 Clients of 4+1 Popular Java APIs

Sawant

Robbes

Bacchelli

2016

2016 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) are a tremendous resource-that is, when they are stable. Several studies have shown that this is unfortunately not the case. Of those, a large-scale study of API changes in the Pharo Smalltalk ecosystem documented several findings about API deprecations and their impact on API clients.We conduct a partial replication of this study, considering more than 25,000 clients of five popular Java APIs on GitHub. This work addresses several shortcomings of the previous study, namely: a study of several distinct API clients in a popular, statically-typed language, with more accurate version information. We compare and contrast our findings with the previous study and highlight new ones, particularly on the API client update practices and the startling similarities between reaction behavior in Smalltalk and Java.

show abstract

Section: Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Reaction to Deprecation of 25,357 Clients of 4+1 Popular Java APIs

Sawant

Robbes

Bacchelli

2016

2016 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, as the framework evolves, changes ranging from a simple refactoring to a complete rearchitecture can break client programs. To lower the cost of adapting client programs to changes in the framework, framework developers rely on a variety of techniques such as automatically capturing and documenting some of their changes [7,10], providing migration paths [3], or deprecating existing methods and indicating new replacements. Unfortunately, current tools cannot capture changes more complex than refactorings, and manually documenting a framework's evolution is not always cost-effective, especially for fast-evolving frameworks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommending Adaptive Changes for Framework Evolution

Dagenais

Robillard

2011

ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.

111

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the course of a framework's evolution, changes ranging from a simple refactoring to a complete rearchitecture can break client programs. Finding suitable replacements for framework elements that were accessed by a client program and deleted as part of the framework's evolution can be a challenging task. We present a recommendation system, SemDiff, that suggests adaptations to client programs by analyzing how a framework adapts to its own changes. In a study of the evolution of the Eclipse JDT framework and three client programs, our approach recommended relevant adaptive changes with a high level of precision, and detected non-trivial changes typically undiscovered by current refactoring detection techniques.

show abstract

“…Several approaches go beyond the limits of refactoring by providing some general means of transformation [CN96,KH98,BTF05,PLHM08]. Again, the showcases for all these approaches concern API evolution or migration between very much similar APIs.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of an API Migration for Two XML APIs

Bartolomei

Czarnecki

Lämmel

et al. 2010

Software Language Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. API migration refers to adapting an application such that its dependence on a given API (the source API) is eliminated in favor of depending on an alternative API (the target API) with the source and target APIs serving the same domain. One may attempt to automate API migration by code transformation or wrapping of some sort. API migration is relatively well understood for the special case where source and target APIs are essentially different versions of the same API. API migration is much less understood for the general case where the two APIs have been developed more or less independently of each other. The present paper exercises a simple instance of the general case and develops engineering techniques towards the mastery of API migration. That is, we study wrapper-based migration between two prominent XML APIs for the Java platform. The migration follows an iterative and test-driven approach and allows us to identify, classify, and measure various differences between the studied APIs in a systematic way.

show abstract

Semi-automatic update of applications in response to library changes

Cited by 87 publications

References 13 publications

On the Reaction to Deprecation of 25,357 Clients of 4+1 Popular Java APIs

On the Reaction to Deprecation of 25,357 Clients of 4+1 Popular Java APIs

Recommending Adaptive Changes for Framework Evolution

Study of an API Migration for Two XML APIs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About