Design of an empirical study for comparing the usability of concurrent programming languages

International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 325-334

  Nanz, Sebastian ^a   Torshizi, Faraz ^b   Pedroni, Michela ^a   Meyer, Bertrand ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Concurrency; Empirical study; Programming languages; Usability

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; JAVA PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE; MULTICORE PROGRAMMING; PROGRAM DEBUGGING; SOFTWARE DESIGN;

CONCURRENCY; CONCURRENT OBJECT-ORIENTED PROGRAMMING; CONCURRENT PROGRAMMING; CONCURRENT PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; MULTI-CORE PROCESSING; MULTI-THREADED JAVA PROGRAMS; USABILITY;

OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAMMING;

EID: 84858738466     PISSN: 19493770     EISSN: 19493789     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/esem.2011.41     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. B. S. Bloom (Ed.), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. London: Longmans, 1956.
2. F. Cantonnet, Y. Yao, M. Zahran, and T. El-Ghazawi, "Productivity analysis of the UPC language, " in Proc. IPDPS'04, 2004.
3. L. Hochstein, V. R. Basili, U. Vishkin, and J. Gilbert, "A pilot study to compare programming effort for two parallel programming models, " Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 81, no. 11, pp. 1920-1930, 2008.
4. L. Hochstein, J. Carver, F. Shull, S. Asgari, and V. Basili, "Parallel programmer productivity: A case study of novice parallel programmers, " in Proc. SC'05. IEEE, 2005, p. 35.
5. A. Kamandi and J. Habibi, "A comparison of metric-based and empirical approaches for cognitive analysis of modeling languages, " Fundam. Inf., vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 337-352, 2009.
6. V. I. Levenshtein, "Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions and reversals." Soviet Physics Doklady, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 707-710, 1966.
7. M. Luff, "Empirically investigating parallel programming paradigms: A null result, " in Proc. PLATEAU'09, 2009.
8. B. Meyer, Object-Oriented Software Construction, 2nd ed. Prentice-Hall, 1997.
9. S. Nanz, F. Torshizi, M. Pedroni, and B. Meyer, "A comparative study of the usability of two object-oriented concurrent programming languages, " http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.6047, 2010.
10. S. Nanz, F. Torshizi, M. Pedroni, and B. Meyer, "Empirical assessment of languages for teaching concurrency: Methodology and application, " in Proc. CSEE&T'11. IEEE Computer Society, 2011, pp. 477-481.
11. P. Nienaltowski, "Practical framework for contract-based concurrent object-oriented programming, " Ph.D. dissertation, ETH Zurich, 2007.
12. C. J. Rossbach, O. S. Hofmann, and E. Witchel, "Is transactional programming actually easier?" in Proc. PPoPP'10. ACM, 2010, pp. 47-56.
13. C. Sadowski and A. Shewmaker, "The last mile: parallel programming and usability, " in Proc. FoSER'10. ACM, 2010, pp. 309-314.
14. D. Szafron and J. Schaeffer, "An experiment to measure the usability of parallel programming systems, " Concurrency: Practice and Experience, vol. 8, pp. 147-166, 1996.
15. The Java Language, http://java.sun.com/.
16. F. Torshizi, J. S. Ostroff, R. F. Paige, and M. Chechik, "The SCOOP concurrency model in Java-like languages, " in Proc. CPA'09. IOS, 2009, pp. 155-178.
17. G. V. Wilson, J. Schaeffer, and D. Szafron, "Enterprise in context: assessing the usability of parallel programming environments, " in Proc. CASCON'93. IBM Press, 1993, pp. 999-1010.