by F Macdonald, F Macdonald, J Miller, J Miller, A Brooks, A Brooks, M Roper, M Roper
Software, Software Testing, Verification and Reliability
http://www.cs.strath.ac.uk/research/EFOCS/Research-Reports/EFoCS-14-95.ps.Z
Add To MetaCart
Abstract:
The benefits of the object-oriented paradigm are widely cited. At the same time, inspection is deemed to be the most cost-effective means of detecting defects in software products. Why then, is there no published experience, let alone quantitative data, on the application of inspection to object-oriented systems? We describe the facilities of the object-oriented paradigm and the issues that these raise when inspecting object-oriented code. Several problems are caused by the disparity between the static code structure and its dynamic runtime behaviour. The large number of small methods in object-oriented systems can also cause problems. We then go on to describe three areas which may help mitigate problems found. Firstly, the use of various programming methods may assist in making object-oriented code easier to inspect. Secondly, improved program documentation can help the inspector understand the code which is under inspection. Finally, tool support can help the inspector to analyse the dynamic behaviour of the code. We conclude that while both the object-oriented paradigm and inspection provide excellent benefits on their own, combining the two may be a difficult exercise, requiring extensive support if it is to be successful.
Citations
|
3620
|
Design Patterns. Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software
– Gamma, Helm, et al.
- 1998
|
|
629
|
Eiffel: the language
– Meyer
- 1992
|
|
230
|
Design and code inspections to reduce errors in program development
– Fagan
|
|
127
|
Advances in Software Inspections
– Fagan
- 1986
|
|
121
|
Software Inspection
– Gilb, Graham
- 1993
|
|
112
|
Assuring Good Style for Object-Oriented Programs
– Lieberherr, Holland
- 1989
|
|
106
|
Maintenance support for object-oriented programs
– Wilde, Huitt
- 1992
|
|
74
|
SeeSoft --A Tool for Visualizing Line Oriented Software Statistics
– Eick, Steffen, et al.
|
|
68
|
Designing documentation to compensate for delocalized plans
– Soloway, Pinto, et al.
- 1988
|
|
56
|
E.Soloway. Delocalized plans and program comprehension
– Letovsky
- 1986
|
|
54
|
Understanding object-oriented: A unifying paradigm
– Korson, McGregor
- 1990
|
|
51
|
Experience with inspection in ultralargescale developments
– Russell
- 1991
|
|
47
|
Maintaining object-oriented software
– Wilde, Matthews, et al.
- 1993
|
|
46
|
Precise Documentation of Well-Structured Programs
– Parnas, Madey, et al.
- 1994
|
|
22
|
Experience with Fagan's inspection method
– Doolan
- 1992
|
|
15
|
Gaps in the object-oriented paradigm
– Jones
- 1994
|
|
10
|
Fifteen Principles of Software Engineering
– Davis
- 1994
|
|
10
|
Polymorphism considered harmful
– Ponder, Bush
- 1994
|
|
7
|
A review of tool support for software inspection
– Macdonald, Miller, et al.
- 1995
|
|
7
|
Structured inspections of code
– Emden
- 1992
|
|
6
|
Essays on Object-Oriented software engineering, Volume I
– Berard
- 1993
|
|
5
|
Integrating and Testing of Object-Oriented Software
– Juttner, Kolb, et al.
- 1994
|
|
4
|
Maintenance Support Needs for ObjectOriented Software
– Crocker, Mayrhauser
- 1993
|
|
4
|
Visualizing the Behaviour of Object-Oriented Systems
– Pauw, Helm, et al.
- 1993
|
|
1
|
The C++ Programming Language (2ed
– Stroustrup
- 1991
|
