loading...
Evaluating C++ Design Pattern Miner Tools
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania September 27-September 29
DOI Bookmark: http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/SCAM.2006.13Sixth IEEE International Workshop on ...
 This Article 
 
PDF
HTML
 
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Lajos Jeno Fulop, University of Szeged, Hungary
Tamas Gyovai, evosoft Hungary Ltd., Hlungary
Rudolf Ferenc, University of Szeged, Hungary
Many articles and tools have been proposed over the years for mining design patterns from source code. These tools differ in several aspects, thus their fair comparison is hard. Besides the basic methodology, the main differences are that the tools operate on different representations of the subject system and that the pattern definitions differ as well.

In this paper we first provide a common measurement platform for three well-known pattern mining systems, Columbus, Maisa and CrocoPat. Then we compare these tools on four C++ open-source systems: DC++,WinMerge, Jikes and Mozilla. Columbus can discover patterns from the C++ source code itself, while Maisa and CrocoPat require the representation of a software system in a special textual format, so we extended Columbus to provide the common input for the two other tools.

We compared these tools in terms of speed, memory consumption and the differences between the hits. While the first two aspects showed comparable results, the recognition capabilities were quite diverse. This is probably due to the significant difference in how the patterns to be recognized and formalized by the tools. Therefore we conclude that a more precise and formal description of design patterns would be desirable.

Citation:
Lajos Jeno Fulop, Tamas Gyovai, Rudolf Ferenc, "Evaluating C++ Design Pattern Miner Tools," scam, pp.127-138, Sixth IEEE International Workshop on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation (SCAM'06), 2006
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.