Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Continuous code quality: are we (really) doing that?


Vassallo, Carmine; Palomba, Fabio; Bacchelli, Alberto; Gall, Harald C. (2018). Continuous code quality: are we (really) doing that? In: ASE '18: 33rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, Montpellier France, 3 October 2018 - 7 October 2018, 790-795.

Abstract

Continuous Integration (CI) is a software engineering practice where developers constantly integrate their changes to a project through an automated build process. The goal of CI is to provide developers with prompt feedback on several quality dimensions after each change. Indeed, previous studies provided empirical evidence on a positive association between properly following CI principles and source code quality. A core principle behind CI is Continuous Code Quality (also known as CCQ, which includes automated testing and automated code inspection) may appear simple and effective, yet we know little about its practical adoption. In this paper, we propose a preliminary empirical investigation aimed at understanding how rigorously practitioners follow CCQ. Our study reveals a strong dichotomy between theory and practice: developers do not perform continuous inspection but rather control for quality only at the end of a sprint and most of the times only on the release branch. Preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341036]. Data and Materials [http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341015].

Abstract

Continuous Integration (CI) is a software engineering practice where developers constantly integrate their changes to a project through an automated build process. The goal of CI is to provide developers with prompt feedback on several quality dimensions after each change. Indeed, previous studies provided empirical evidence on a positive association between properly following CI principles and source code quality. A core principle behind CI is Continuous Code Quality (also known as CCQ, which includes automated testing and automated code inspection) may appear simple and effective, yet we know little about its practical adoption. In this paper, we propose a preliminary empirical investigation aimed at understanding how rigorously practitioners follow CCQ. Our study reveals a strong dichotomy between theory and practice: developers do not perform continuous inspection but rather control for quality only at the end of a sprint and most of the times only on the release branch. Preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341036]. Data and Materials [http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1341015].

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
4 citations in Web of Science®
10 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

3 downloads since deposited on 26 Jan 2021
3 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Conference or Workshop Item (Paper), refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:03 Faculty of Economics > Department of Informatics
Dewey Decimal Classification:000 Computer science, knowledge & systems
Scopus Subject Areas:Physical Sciences > Computational Theory and Mathematics
Physical Sciences > Human-Computer Interaction
Physical Sciences > Software
Language:English
Event End Date:7 October 2018
Deposited On:26 Jan 2021 10:53
Last Modified:27 Jan 2021 21:02
Publisher:ACM
ISBN:9781450359375
OA Status:Green
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3238147.3240729
Other Identification Number:merlin-id:20234

Download

Green Open Access

Download PDF  'Continuous code quality: are we (really) doing that?'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 579kB
View at publisher