Comparative stability of cloned and non-cloned code: An empirical study

Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 1227-1234

  Mondal, Manishankar ^a   Roy, Chanchal K ^a   Rahman, Md Saidur ^a   Saha, Ripon K ^a   Krinke, Jens ^b   Schneider, Kevin A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

average age; average last change date; clone types; code stability; modification frequency

Indexed keywords

AVERAGE AGE; AVERAGE LAST CHANGE DATE; C-SYSTEMS; CHANGE PATTERNS; CLONE DETECTION; CLONE TYPES; CODE CLONING; DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; LINES OF CODE; MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES; MEASURING METHOD; MODIFICATION FREQUENCY; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING PRACTICES; STABILITY ANALYSIS; STABILITY MEASUREMENTS; SYSTEM SIZE; THREE CLONES;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; SYSTEM STABILITY;

CLONING;

EID: 84863588657     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2245276.2231969     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. L. Aversano, L. Cerulo, and M. D. Penta. How clones are maintained: An empirical study. In Proc. CSMR, pp. 81-90, 2007.
2. CCFinderX. http://www.ccfinder.net/ccfinderxos.html
3. J.R. Cordy and C.K. Roy. The NiCad Clone Detector. In Proc. ICPC (Tool Demo), pp. 219-220, 2011.
4. Fisher's Exact Test. http://in-silico.net/ statistics/fisher-exact-test/ 2x3
5. N. Göde, J. Harder. Clone Stability. In Proc. CSMR, pp. 65-74, 2011.
6. K. Hotta, Y. Sano, Y. Higo, S. Kusumoto. Is Duplicate Code More Frequently Modified than Non-duplicate Code in Software Evolution?: An Empirical Study on Open Source Software. In Proc. EVOL/IWPSE, pp. 73-82, 2010.
7. E. Juergens, F. Deissenboeck, B. Hummel, S. Wagner. Do Code Clones Matter? In Proc. ICSE, pp. 485-495, 2009.
8. C. Kapser and M. W. Godfrey. "Cloning considered harmful" considered harmful: patterns of cloning in software. Emp. Soft. Eng. 13(6), pp. 645-692, 2008.
9. M. Kim, V. Sazawal, D. Notkin, and G. C. Murphy. An empirical study of code clone genealogies. In Proc. ESEC-FSE, pp. 187-196, 2005.
10. J. Krinke. A study of consistent and inconsistent changes to code clones. In Proc. WCRE, pp. 170-178, 2007.
11. J. Krinke. Is cloned code more stable than non-cloned code? In Proc. SCAM, pp. 57-66, 2008.
12. J. Krinke. Is Cloned Code older than Non-Cloned Code? In Proc. IWSC, pp.28-33, 2011.
13. A. Lozano, M. Wermelinger, and B. Nuseibeh. Evaluating the Harmfulness of Cloning: A Change Based Experiment. In Proc. MSR, pp. 18-21, 2007.
14. A. Lozano and M. Wermelinger. Tracking clones' imprint. In Proc. IWSC, pp. 65-72, 2010.
15. A. Lozano, and M. Wermelinger. Assessing the effect of clones on changeability. In Proc. ICSM, pp. 227-236, 2008.
16. C. K. Roy and J. R. Cordy. A mutation / injection-based automatic framework for evaluating code clone detection tools. In Proc. Mutation, pp. 157-166, 2009.
17. C. K. Roy and J. R. Cordy. NICAD: Accurate Detection of Near-Miss Intentional Clones Using Flexible Pretty-Printing and Code Normalization. In Proc ICPC, pp. 172-181, 2008.
18. R. K. Saha, M. Asaduzzaman, M. F. Zibran, C. K. Roy, and K. A. Schneider. Evaluating code clone genealogies at release level: An empirical study. In Proc. SCAM, pp. 87-96, 2010.
19. S. Thummalapenta, L. Cerulo, L. Aversano, and M. D. Penta. An empirical study on the maintenance of source code clones. In ESE, 15(1), pp. 1-34, 2009.