Prioritizing warnings by analyzing software history
Submitted by mernst on Wed, 2011-11-30 14:35
| Title | Prioritizing warnings by analyzing software history |
| Publication Type | Conference Paper |
| Year of Publication | 2007 |
| Authors | Kim S, Ernst MD |
| Conference Name | MSR 2007: International Workshop on Mining Software Repositories |
| Date or Month Published | May 19–20 |
| Conference Location | Minneapolis, MN, USA |
| Abstract | <p>Automatic bug finding tools tend to have high false positive rates: most warnings do not indicate real bugs. Usually bug finding tools prioritize each warning category (such as the priority of ``overflow'' is 1 or the priority of ``jumbled incremental'' is 3), but the tools' prioritization is not very effective. </p> <p> In this paper, we prioritize warning categories by analyzing the software change history. The underlying intuition is that if warnings from a category are resolved quickly by developers, the warnings in the category are important. Experiments with three bug finding tools (FindBugs, Jlint, and PMD) and two open source projects (Columba and jEdit) indicate that different warning categories have very different lifetimes. Based on that observation, we propose a preliminary algorithm for warning category prioritizing.</p> |
| Downloads | |
| Citation Key | KimE2007:MSR2007 |
Last changed Mon, 2013-06-03 10:27

cs.