1,721,042 research outputs found
An Exploratory Study of Developers' Toolbox in an Agile Team
No full textAlthough Agile teams supposedly value individuals and interactions
over processes and tools, tools still represent an important support for
developers’ work. Existing studies investigate only partially tool usage in nonAgile teams. Moreover, it is not clear to which extent their findings are valid
also for Agile teams. This study takes the first steps towards understanding tool
usage in Agile teams by investigating the types and variety of tools used and the
actual purpose for which they are employed. As expected, we found that
communication accounts for an increased amount of time, but, surprisingly, a
large share of it is represented by instant messaging or email rather than face-toface communication. Other findings show that developers’ toolbox contains
only a very small number of tools and a relevant amount of time is spent on
browsing the Internet and navigating through the file system
Investigating the Usefulness of Pair-Programming in a Mature Agile Team
No full textPair-programming (PP) is one of the key practices of Agile Methods
and there are various claims regarding its benefits. However, the empirical
evidence to sustain these claims is insufficient, often coming from studies with
students as participants. Moreover, the results are sometimes contradictory.
Nevertheless, there are already mature agile teams that currently use PP, pairing
on an “as needed” basis. We investigate the dynamics of the pairing process in a
mature Agile team to understand when practitioners consider PP useful and to
compare this with the claimed benefits of PP. In this paper we present the
results of a 3 months study of PP in an Agile team of 16 developers
Ensuring Continuous Data Accuracy in AISEMA System
No full textAutomated In-process Software Engineering
Measurement and Analysis (AISEMA) systems are powerful tools
to monitor and improve the software development process.
However, to be useful, it is required that such tools never stop
working. Therefore, they need the support of advanced
monitoring systems able to detect and locate malfunctions and
inform automatically human operators providing all the
information required to solve the problem. This paper describe
the approach and the tools developed to support a specific
AISEMA system developed to support both managers and
developers in implementing continuous process improvement
initiatives
A Case-study on Using an Automated In-process Software Engineering Measurement and Analysis System in an Industrial Environment
No full textPoster: An Initial Characterization of Bug-Injecting Development Sessions
No full textEven experienced developers rigorously testing their code and
using state of the art tools and practices, inject every now and then
bugs into the code. There is a huge amount of literature about the
characterization of such bugs including the effectiveness of the
reports and the fixes, the time required to fix them, etc. Existing
works have already identified several factors considered to
influence directly the bug injection. However, there is no support
for the claims made so far using data coming from industrial, bug-
injecting development sessions. This paper aims at filling this gap
by analyzing industrial bug-injecting development sessions from
several points of view. It investigates 49 bug-injecting
development sessions evaluating and discussing three alleged,
developers-centered main causes of bug injection: expertise,
knowledge of code, and distraction. Additionally, the paper
provides insights into the complete lifetime of bugs from injection
to the fix and discusses implications for bug predictio
Cooperation, collaboration and pair-programming: Field studies on backup behavior
No full textConsidering that pair programming has been extensively studied for more than a decade, it can seem quite surprising that there is such a lack of consensus on both its best use and its benefits. We argue that pair programming is not a replacement of usual developer interactions, but rather a formalization and enhancement of naturally occurring interactions. Consequently, we study and classify a broader range of developer interactions, evaluating them for type, purpose and patterns of occurrence, with the aim to identify situations in which pair programming is likely to be truly needed and thus most beneficial. We study the concrete pair programming practices in both academic and industrial settings. All interactions between teammates were recorded as backup behavior activities. In each of these two projects, developers were free to interact when needed. All team interactions were self-recorded by the teammates. The analysis of the interaction tokens shows two salient features: solo work is an important component of teamwork and team interactions have two main purposes, namely cooperation and collaboration. Cooperative backup behavior occurs when a developer provides help to a teammate. Collaborative backup behavior occurs when the teammates are sharing the same goal toward solving an issue. We found that collaborative backup behavior, which occurred much less often, is close to the formal definition of pair programming. This study suggests that mandatory pair programming may be less efficient in organizations where solo work could be done and when some interactions are for cooperative activities. Based on these results, we discussed the potential implications concerning the best use of pair programming in practice, a more effective evaluation of its use, its potential benefits and emerging directions of future research
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
- …
