scholarly journals Using Paragraph Vectors to improve our existing code review assisting tool-CRUSO

Author(s):  
Ritu Kapur ◽  
Balwinder Sodhi ◽  
Poojith U Rao ◽  
Shipra Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Pavlína Wurzel Gonçalves ◽  
Enrico Fregnan ◽  
Tobias Baum ◽  
Kurt Schneider ◽  
Alberto Bacchelli
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Dong Wang ◽  
Raula Gaikovina Kula ◽  
Takashi Ishio ◽  
Kenichi Matsumoto

Author(s):  
Maria Caulo ◽  
Bin Lin ◽  
Gabriele Bavota ◽  
Giuseppe Scanniello ◽  
Michele Lanza

2022 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Jevgenija Pantiuchina ◽  
Bin Lin ◽  
Fiorella Zampetti ◽  
Massimiliano Di Penta ◽  
Michele Lanza ◽  
...  

Refactoring operations are behavior-preserving changes aimed at improving source code quality. While refactoring is largely considered a good practice, refactoring proposals in pull requests are often rejected after the code review. Understanding the reasons behind the rejection of refactoring contributions can shed light on how such contributions can be improved, essentially benefiting software quality. This article reports a study in which we manually coded rejection reasons inferred from 330 refactoring-related pull requests from 207 open-source Java projects. We surveyed 267 developers to assess their perceived prevalence of these identified rejection reasons, further complementing the reasons. Our study resulted in a comprehensive taxonomy consisting of 26 refactoring-related rejection reasons and 21 process-related rejection reasons. The taxonomy, accompanied with representative examples and highlighted implications, provides developers with valuable insights on how to ponder and polish their refactoring contributions, and indicates a number of directions researchers can pursue toward better refactoring recommenders.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document