A framework for the simulation of structural software evolution

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

A framework for the simulation of structural software evolution

Full text

Pdf (2.03 MB)

Source

ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS) archive
Volume 18 , Issue 4 (September 2008) table of contents

Article No. 17

Year of Publication: 2008

ISSN:1049-3301

Authors

Benjamin Stopford	Birkbeck, University of London, UK
Steve Counsell	Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 23, Downloads (12 Months): 304, Citation Count: 0

Additional Information:

abstract references index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1391978.1391983 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

As functionality is added to an aging piece of software, its original design and structure will tend to erode. This can lead to high coupling, low cohesion and other undesirable effects associated with spaghetti architectures. The underlying forces that cause such degradation have been the subject of much research. However, progress in this field is slow, as its complexity makes it difficult to isolate the causal flows leading to these effects. This is further complicated by the difficulty of generating enough empirical data, in sufficient quantity, and attributing such data to specific points in the causal chain. This article describes a framework for simulating the structural evolution of software. A complete simulation model is built by incrementally adding modules to the framework, each of which contributes an individual evolutionary effect. These effects are then combined to form a multifaceted simulation that evolves a fictitious code base in a manner approximating real-world behavior. We describe the underlying principles and structures of our framework from a theoretical and user perspective; a validation of a simple set of evolutionary parameters is then provided and three empirical software studies generated from open-source software (OSS) are used to support claims and generated results. The research illustrates how simulation can be used to investigate a complex and under-researched area of the development cycle. It also shows the value of incorporating certain human traits into a simulation—factors that, in real-world system development, can significantly influence evolutionary structures.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	James M. Bieman , Greg Straw , Huxia Wang , P. Willard Munger , Roger T. Alexander, Design Patterns and Change Proneness: An Examination of Five Evolving Systems, Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Software Metrics, p.40, September 03-05, 2003
	2	Grady Booch, Object-oriented analysis and design with applications (2nd ed.), Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 1993
	3	Lionel Briand , Prem Devanbu , Walcelio Melo, An investigation into coupling measures for C++, Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Software engineering, p.412-421, May 17-23, 1997, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/253228.253367]
	4	Lionel C. Briand , John W. Daly , Jürgen K. Wüst, A Unified Framework for Coupling Measurement in Object-Oriented Systems, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.25 n.1, p.91-121, January 1999 [doi>10.1109/32.748920]
	5	Frederick P. Brooks, Jr., The mythical man-month (anniversary ed.), Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1995
	6	Capiluppi, A., Morisio, M., and Ramil, J. 2004. Studying the evolution of open source systems at different levels of granularity. In Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Program Comprehension. Bari, Italy, 172--182.
	7	Ned Chapin , Joanne E. Hale , Khaled Md. Kham , Juan F. Ramil , Wui-Gee Tan, Types of software evolution and software maintenance, Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice, v.13 n.1, p.3-30, Jan. 2001
	8	S. R. Chidamber , C. F. Kemerer, A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.20 n.6, p.476-493, June 1994 [doi>10.1109/32.295895]
	9	Steve Counsell , Youssef Hassoun , Roger Johnson , Keith Mannock , Emilia Mendes, Trends in Java code changes: the key to identification of refactorings?, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Principles and practice of programming in Java, June 16-18, 2003, Kilkenny City, Ireland
	10	S. Counsell , Y. Hassoun , G. Loizou , R. Najjar, Common refactorings, a dependency graph and some code smells: an empirical study of Java OSS, Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE international symposium on Empirical software engineering, September 21-22, 2006, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil [doi>10.1145/1159733.1159777]
	11	Trung Dinh-Trong , James M. Bieman, Open Source Software Development: A Case Study of FreeBSD, Proceedings of the Software Metrics, 10th International Symposium, p.96-105, September 11-17, 2004 [doi>10.1109/METRICS.2004.33]
	12	Norman E. Fenton , Shari Lawrence Pfleeger, Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach, PWS Publishing Co., Boston, MA, 1998
	13	Rudolf Ferenc , Istvan Siket , Tibor Gyimothy, Extracting Facts from Open Source Software, Proceedings of the 20th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, p.60-69, September 11-14, 2004
	14	FINDBUGS. 2007. http://findbugs.sourceforge.net/.
	15	Forrester, J. 1969. Urban Dynamics. Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA.
	16	Forrester, J. 1971. Counter-intuitive behaviour of social systems. Tech. Rev. 73(3), 52--68.
	17	Martin Fowler, Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2002
	18	Refactoring: improving the design of existing code, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1999
	19	Erich Gamma , Richard Helm , Ralph Johnson , John Vlissides, Design patterns: elements of reusable object-oriented software, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1995
	20	Gilbert, N. and Terna, P. 2000. How to build and use agent-based models in social science. Mind Soc. 1, 1, 57--72.
	21	Tudor Gîrba , Stéphane Ducasse, Modeling history to analyze software evolution: Research Articles, Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, v.18 n.3, p.207-236, May 2006 [doi>10.1002/smr.v18:3]
	22	GNU. 2008. http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/.
	23	William G. Griswold , David Notkin, Automated assistance for program restructuring, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), v.2 n.3, p.228-269, July 1993 [doi>10.1145/152388.152389]
	24	Maurice H. Halstead, Elements of Software Science (Operating and programming systems series), Elsevier Science Inc., New York, NY, 1977
	25	R. Harrison , S. Counsell , R. Nithi, Experimental assessment of the effect of inheritance on the maintainability of object-oriented systems, Journal of Systems and Software, v.52 n.2-3, p.173-179, June 1 2000 [doi>10.1016/S0164-1212(99)00144-2]
	26	Kellner, M., Madachy, R., and Raffo, D. 1999. Software process modeling and simulation: why, what, how, J. Syst. Softw. 46, 2/3, 91--105.
	27	A Simple Static Model for Understanding the Dynamic Behavior of Programs, Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Workshop on Program Comprehension, p.46, June 24-26, 2004
	28	Kemerer, C. F. and Slaughter, S. 1996. Need for more longitudinal studies of software maintenance. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Empirical Studies of Software Maintenance.
	29	Chris F. Kemerer , Sandra Slaughter, An Empirical Approach to Studying Software Evolution, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.25 n.4, p.493-509, July 1999 [doi>10.1109/32.799945]
	30	Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C., Loingtier, J-M., and Irwin, J. 1997. Aspect-oriented programming. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP'97). Jyvaskyla, Finland, 220--242.
	31	Lehman, M. 1980. On understanding laws, evolution, and conservation in the large-program life cycle, J. Syst. Softw. 1, 213--221.
	32	Tom Mens , Juan F. Ramil , Michael W. Godfrey, Analyzing the Evolution of Large-Scale Software: Issue Overviews, Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, v.16 n.6, p.363-365, November 2004 [doi>10.1002/smr.v16:6]
	33	Bertrand Meyer, Applying "Design by Contract", Computer, v.25 n.10, p.40-51, October 1992 [doi>10.1109/2.161279]
	34	Miiller, G. A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psych. Rev. 63, 81--97.
	35	Mubarak, A., Counsell, S., Hierons, R., and Hassoun, Y. 2007. Package evolvability and its relationship with refactoring. In Proceedings of 3rd International ERCIM Symposium on Software Evolution. Paris, France.
	36	Jürgen Münch , Ove Armbrust, Using Empirical Knowledge from Replicated Experiments for Software Process Simulation: A Practical Example, Proceedings of the 2003 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, p.18, September 30-October 01, 2003
	37	E. Nasseri , S. Counsell , M. Shepperd, An Empirical Study of Evolution of Inheritance in Java OSS, Proceedings of the 19th Australian Conference on Software Engineering (aswec 2008), p.269-278, March 26-28, 2008
	38	William F. Opdyke, Refactoring object-oriented frameworks, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, 1992
	39	Parnas, D. 1971. Information distribution aspects of design methodology, In Proceedings of the IFIP Congress (1). Ljubljana, Yugoslavia, 339--344.
	40	David Mitchell Raffo , Marc I. Kellner , Thomas E. Morton , Robert H. Sturges, Modeling software processes quantitatively and assessing the impact of potential process changes on process performance, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 1996
	41	David M. Raffo , Marc I. Kellner, Empirical analysis in software process simulation modeling, Journal of Systems and Software, v.53 n.1, p.31-41, July 15, 2000 [doi>10.1016/S0164-1212(00)00006-6]
	42	Gregorio Robles , Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona , Juan Julian Merelo, Beyond source code: the importance of other artifacts in software development (a case study), Journal of Systems and Software, v.79 n.9, p.1233-1248, September 2006 [doi>10.1016/j.jss.2006.02.048]
	43	Siri-on Setamanit , Wayne Wakeland , David Raffo, Planning and improving global software development process using simulation, Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Global software development for the practitioner, May 23-23, 2006, Shanghai, China [doi>10.1145/1138506.1138510]
	44	Smith, N., Capiluppi, A., and Fernandez-Ramil, J. 2006. Agent-based simulation of open source evolution. J. Softw. Proc.-Improv. Pract. 11, 4, 423--434.
	45	Smith, N., Capiuppi, A., and Fernadez-Ramil, J. 2005. A study of open source evolution data using qualitative simulation. J. Softw. Proc.-Improv. Pract. 10, 3, 287--300.
	46	Harry M. Sneed, A Cost Model for Software Maintenance & Evolution, Proceedings of the 20th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, p.264-273, September 11-14, 2004
	47	SOURCEFORGE. net. 2007. www.sourceforge.net.
	48	Stopford, B. and Counsell, S. 2006. Simulating the structural evolution of software. In Proceedings of the International Software Process Workshop (PROSIM'06). Shanghai, China. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3966, 294--301.
	49	Wernick, P., and Lehman, M. 1999. Software process white box modeling for FEAST/1. J. Syst. Softw. 46, 2/3, 193--201.