User evaluation of correctness conditions: A case study of cooperability

Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools, PLATEAU'10

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages

  Sadowski, Caitlin ^a   Yi, Jaeheon ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Concurrency; Cooperability; Parallel programming; User evaluation

Indexed keywords

CONCURRENCY; CONTEXT SWITCH; COOPERABILITY; CORRECTNESS CRITERION; EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE; INTERLEAVINGS; NUMBER OF THREADS; PROGRAM POINTS; SPECIFIC YIELD; USER EVALUATION; USER EVALUATIONS;

PROGRAM DEBUGGING;

PARALLEL PROGRAMMING;

EID: 79952429005     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1937117.1937119     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. I. Campbell. Chi-squared and Fisher-Irwin tests of two-by-two tables with small sample recommendations. Statistics in Medicine, 26:3661-3675, 2007. (Pubitemid 47180703)
2. K. Ebcioglu, V. Sarkar, T. El-Ghazawi, J. Urbanic, and P. Center. An experiment in measuring the productivity of three parallel programming languages. In Workshop on Productivity and Performance in High-End Computing (P-PHEC), 2006.
3. C. Flanagan and S. N. Freund. Atomizer: A dynamic atomicity checker for multithreaded programs. In Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), 2004.
4. C. Halverson and J. Carver. Climbing the plateau: Getting from study design to data that means something. In Workshop on Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools (PLATEAU), 2009.
5. L. Hochstein, V. Basili, U. Vishkin, and J. Gilbert. A pilot study to compare programming effort for two parallel programming models. Journal of Systems and Software, 81(11):1920-1930, 2008.
6. L. Hochstein, J. Carver, F. Shull, S. Asgari, and V. Basili. Parallel programmer productivity: A case study of novice parallel programmers. In Conference on High Performance Networking and Computing (SC), 2005.
7. E. A. Lee. The problem with threads. Computer, 39(5):33-42, 2006. (Pubitemid 43786509)
8. S. Lu, S. Park, E. Seo, and Y. Zhou. Learning from mistakes: a comprehensive study on real world concurrency bug characteristics. SIGPLAN Notices, 2008.
9. M. Luff. Empirically investigating parallel programming paradigms: A null result. In Workshop on Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools (PLATEAU), 2009.
10. B. Myers and A. Ko. The past, present and future of programming in HCI. In Human-Computer Interaction Consortium (HCIC), 2009.
11. J. Nielsen. Usability Inspection Methods. Wiley, 1994.
12. J. Pane and B. Myers. Usability issues in the design of novice programming systems. Human-Computer Interaction Institute Technical Report CMU-HCII-96-101, 1996.
13. C.-S. Park and K. Sen. Randomized active atomicity violation detection in concurrent programs. In International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE), 2008.
14. G. Richards, S. Lebresne, B. Burg, and J. Vitek. An analysis of the dynamic behavior of JavaScript programs. In Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI), 2010.
15. C. Rossbach, O. Hofmann, and E. Witchel. Is transactional programming actually easier? In Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming (PPoPP), 2010.
16. D. Szafron, J. Schaeffer, and A. Edmonton. An experiment to measure the usability of parallel programming systems. Concurrency Practice and Experience, 8(2):147-166, 1996. (Pubitemid 126662832)
17. J. Yi and C. Flanagan. Effects for cooperable and serializable threads. In Workshop on Types in Language Design and Implementation (TLDI), 2010.