Download to read offline
![Context: Overall Process
1-2. Specification and Detection of DDs
More and more tools and techniques
Actively researched area
Method DECOR (Defect dEtection for CORrection) [Moha 06]
3. Suggestion
3 S ti
Manual identification of the modifications
Time-, resource-consuming, error-prone activity
, g, p y
4. Correction
Refactorings
g
Technique used to change “the internal structure of software to make it
easier to understand and cheaper to modify without changing its
observable behavior”
Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 7](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/icfca08-ppt-130410194547-phpapp02/75/ICFCA08-ppt-7-2048.jpg)
![What Kind of Defects ?
Design Patterns are “good” solutions to recurring design problems
Design Defects (DDs)
are “bad” solutions to recurring problems, Antipatterns [Brown 98]
hinder d
hi d development and maintenance by making programs h d t
l t d i t b ki harder to
comprehend and/or evolve
DDs of interest: infected by low cohesion and high coupling
Cohesion: how closely the methods are related to the variables in
the class
Coupling: the degree of its reliance on services provided by other
classes
Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 8](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/icfca08-ppt-130410194547-phpapp02/75/ICFCA08-ppt-8-2048.jpg)
![What Kind of Defects ?
An example of DDs [Brown 98]
Blob (God Class)
“ Procedural-style design leads to one object with a
lion’s share of the responsibilities while most other
objects only hold data or execute simple processes ”
Large controller class
Many fields and methods with a low cohesion
High coupled with the data stored in
associated data classes
Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 9](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/icfca08-ppt-130410194547-phpapp02/75/ICFCA08-ppt-9-2048.jpg)
![Contribution
Suggestion
RCA [Rouane 07, Ph.D. Thesis]
Extension of FCA to relational d
E i f l i l data
Models the inter-object links and infers description logics role like
relations between concepts
RCA provides a suitable framework for clustering individuals along
the properties they share and their links with other individuals
Identify methods that share common fields and methods that call
common methods cohesive sets low coupled
Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 13](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/icfca08-ppt-130410194547-phpapp02/75/ICFCA08-ppt-13-2048.jpg)
![Contribution
Suggestion
RCA [Rouane 07, Ph.D. Thesis]
Extension of FCA to relational d
E i f l i l data
Models the inter-object links and infers description logics role like
relations between concepts
RCA provides a suitable framework for clustering individuals along
the properties they share and their links with other individuals
Identify methods that share common fields and methods that call
common methods cohesive sets low coupled
«D
Develop an automated approach f suggesting d f t
l t t d h for ti defect-
correcting refactorings using RCA »
Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 14](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/icfca08-ppt-130410194547-phpapp02/75/ICFCA08-ppt-14-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byPtidej Team
ICFCA08.ppt
1) The document presents an approach for suggesting refactorings to correct design defects (DDs), specifically the "Blob" defect, using relational concept analysis (RCA). 2) RCA is used to identify cohesive sets of methods and fields in classes affected by Blob defects. These cohesive sets suggest refactorings like moving methods/fields to new or existing classes. 3) An experimental study on four open-source programs evaluated the approach, finding an average precision of 57% for suggested refactorings that improved class structure and design. The approach could potentially be generalized to other types of DDs.
More Related Content
ICFCA08.ppt
- 1. Refactorings of DesignDefects using Relational Concept Analysis Naouel Moha, Amine Mohamed Rouane Hacene, Petko Valtchev, and Yann-Gaël Guéhéneuc LORIA, France DIRO, University of Montréal, Canada LATECE, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Canada ICFCA’08 Montréal (Qc), Canada, February 25-28, 2008
- 2. Context Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 2
- 3. Context Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 3
- 4. Context Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 4
- 5. Context: Overall Process Textual descriptions of design defects 1 S 3 P S E U C G I G F E I S C T A I T O I N O N Rules Refactorings 2 D C 4 O E R T R E E C C T T I I O O N N Classes having Better design defects Design Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 5
- 6. Context: Overall Process Textual descriptions of design defects 1 S 3 P S E U C G I G F E I S C T A I T O I N O N Rules Refactorings 2 D C 4 O E R T R E E C C T T I I O O N N Classes having Better design defects Design Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 6
- 7. Context: Overall Process 1-2. Specification and Detection of DDs More and more tools and techniques Actively researched area Method DECOR (Defect dEtection for CORrection) [Moha 06] 3. Suggestion 3 S ti Manual identification of the modifications Time-, resource-consuming, error-prone activity , g, p y 4. Correction Refactorings g Technique used to change “the internal structure of software to make it easier to understand and cheaper to modify without changing its observable behavior” Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 7
- 8. What Kind ofDefects ? Design Patterns are “good” solutions to recurring design problems Design Defects (DDs) are “bad” solutions to recurring problems, Antipatterns [Brown 98] hinder d hi d development and maintenance by making programs h d t l t d i t b ki harder to comprehend and/or evolve DDs of interest: infected by low cohesion and high coupling Cohesion: how closely the methods are related to the variables in the class Coupling: the degree of its reliance on services provided by other classes Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 8
- 9. What Kind ofDefects ? An example of DDs [Brown 98] Blob (God Class) “ Procedural-style design leads to one object with a lion’s share of the responsibilities while most other objects only hold data or execute simple processes ” Large controller class Many fields and methods with a low cohesion High coupled with the data stored in associated data classes Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 9
- 10. An Example Blob Before Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 10
- 11. An Example How t correct th d f t ? H to t the defect Before After Large and complex class Large class becomes less complex Small data classes Data classes gain more behaviour Not object-oriented More object-oriented style Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 11
- 12. An Example Redistribute l R di t ib t class members among existing classes ( ith possibly b i ti l (with ibl new classes) to increase cohesion and–or decrease coupling Before After Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 12
- 13. Contribution Suggestion RCA [Rouane 07, Ph.D. Thesis] Extension of FCA to relational d E i f l i l data Models the inter-object links and infers description logics role like relations between concepts RCA provides a suitable framework for clustering individuals along the properties they share and their links with other individuals Identify methods that share common fields and methods that call common methods cohesive sets low coupled Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 13
- 14. Contribution Suggestion RCA [Rouane 07, Ph.D. Thesis] Extension of FCA to relational d E i f l i l data Models the inter-object links and infers description logics role like relations between concepts RCA provides a suitable framework for clustering individuals along the properties they share and their links with other individuals Identify methods that share common fields and methods that call common methods cohesive sets low coupled «D Develop an automated approach f suggesting d f t l t t d h for ti defect- correcting refactorings using RCA » Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 14
- 15. An Example How t correct th d f t ? H to t the defect Before After Large and complex class Large class becomes less complex Small data classes Data classes gain more behaviour Not object-oriented More object-oriented style Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 15
- 16. An Example How t correct th d f t ? H to t the defect Blob Cohesive Sets Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 16
- 17. An Example How t correct th d f t ? H to t the defect I = {W-borrow_date_Book, W-return_date_book} E = {} I = {‘check_Availability_Book()’} E = {check_Availability_Book()} I = {call:c4} E = {} I = {‘borrow_Book()’} I = {‘reserve_Book()’, W-reserved_book} E = {borrow_Book()} E = {reserve_Book()} Lattice Cohesive Set Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 17
- 18. An Example How t correct th d f t ? H to t the defect Cohesive Sets After Refactoring * * Move Method Mode Field, Create Class Method, Field Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 18
- 19. Suggestion Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 19
- 20. Suggestion 1. RCF Modeling Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 20
- 21. Suggestion 2. RCA Al Algorithms ith Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 21
- 22. Suggestion 2. RCA Al Algorithms ith 9 I = {W-library opened} {W library_opened} E={} 10 I = {‘open_Library()’} E = {open Library()} {open_Library()} 7 I = {‘close_Library()’} E = {close_Library()} Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 22
- 23. Suggestion 2. RCA Al Algorithms ith Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 23
- 24. Suggestion 2. RCA Al Algorithms ith 4 I = {‘check_Availability_Book()’} E = {check_Availability_Book()} 19 I = {call:c4} E={} 3 12 I = {‘borrow_Book()’} I = {‘reserve_Book()’,W-reserved_book} E = {borrow_Book() } E = {reserve_Book()} Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 24
- 25. Suggestion 3. Interpretation Cohesive Sets After Refactoring * Move Method Mode Field, Create Class Method, Field Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 25
- 26. Experimental Study Tooling PADL to model source code and generate contexts Galicia to construct and visualize the concept lattices Experiments E i t Goal: evaluate the relevance of the cohesive sets suggested 4 different open-source programs Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 26
- 27. System Experimental Study Nb of fields/ Nb of Nb of real Size (fields + Blob Class LOC methods cohesive cohesive Precision methods) moved sets sets DHTTransportUDPImpl 2,049 (42+66) 108 (27+32) 59 10 7 70% V2.3.0.6 Azureus DHTControlImpl 1,868 (47+80) 127 (35+62) 97 19 11 58% TRTrackerBTAnnouncerImpl 1,393 (36+47) 83 (24+33) 57 16 5 31% V0.7.1 V1.4 V1.2.1 LogBrokerMonitor 1,142 (29+105)134 (23+85) 108 31 17 55% ene Log4j Category 387 (9+53) 62 (8+44) 52 18 9 50% IndexReader 236 (7+52) 59 (5+30) 35 4 2 50% Nutch Luce QueryParser 829 (36+48) 84 (24+37) 61 13 10 77% FSNamesystem 710 (24+35) 59 (17+25) 42 18 9 50% JobTracker 555 ( (22+31) 53 ) ( (17+18) 35 ) 11 8 73% Average Precision: 57% Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 27
- 28. Conclusion Contribution an approach that uses RCA to suggest refactorings to correct certain DDs in particular Blob DDs, Validation 4 different programs Relevant refactorings to improve programs Future Work - Generalise to other DDs - Assess more programs via our approach - Discuss the suggested refactorings with their developers and apply them Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 28
- 29. Questions Contact: [email protected] http://www-etud.iro.umontreal.ca/~mohanaou Thanks for your attention ! Moha © Refactorings of Design Defects using RCA 29