research-article

Do crosscutting concerns cause modularity problems?

Authors:

Robert J. Walker,

Jonathan SillitoAuthors Info & Claims

FSE '12: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering

Article No.: 49, Pages 1 - 11

https://doi.org/10.1145/2393596.2393654

Published: 11 November 2012 Publication History

Abstract

It has been claimed that crosscutting concerns are pervasive and problematic, leading to difficulties in program comprehension, evolution, and long-term design degradation. To consider whether this theory bears out, we examine the patch history of the Mozilla project over a period of a decade to consider whether crosscutting concerns exist therein and whether we can see evidence of problems arising from them. Mozilla is an interesting case, due to its longevity; size; polylingual nature; and use of a patch review process, which maintains strong connections between issue reports and the patches that are intended to address each. We perform several statistical analyses of the over 200,000 patches submitted to address over 90,000 issues reported in this time period. We find that 90% of patches show little or no evidence of scattering, that the scattering of a patch tends to decrease slightly upon review on average, and that the system shows at worst a slow increase of average scattering over time.

References

[1]

J. Asundi and R. Jayant. Patch review processes in open source software development communities. In Proc. Hawaii Int. Conf. Syst. Sci., pp. 166c/1--166c/7, 2007.

Digital Library

[2]

L. Aversano et al. Relationship between design patterns defects and crosscutting concern scattering degree. IET Softw., 3(5):395--409, 2009.

[3]

K. Ayari et al. Threats on building models from CVS and Bugzilla repositories. In Proc. IBM Conf. Centre Adv. Stud. Collab. Res., pp. 215--228, 2007.

Digital Library

[4]

P. Baldi et al. A theory of aspects as latent topics. In Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Conf. Object-Oriented Progr. Syst. Lang. Appl., pp. 543--562, 2008.

Digital Library

[5]

C. Baldwin and K. Clark. Design Rules: The Power of Modularity, volume 1. MIT Press, 1999.

Digital Library

[6]

M. Bartsch and R. Harrison. An exploratory study of the effect of aspect-oriented programming on maintainability. Softw. Qual. J., 16(1):23--44, 2008.

Digital Library

[7]

S. Breu et al. Investigating information needs to improve cooperation between developers and bug reporters. In Proc. Conf. Comput. Supported Coop. Work, pp. 301--310, 2010.

Digital Library

[8]

A. Clauset et al. Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Rev., 51(4):661--703, 2009.

Digital Library

[9]

M. Eaddy et al. Do crosscutting concerns cause defects? IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 34(4):497--515, 2008.

Digital Library

[10]

E. Figueiredo et al. Evolving software product lines with aspects. In Proc. Int. Conf. Softw. Eng., pp. 261--270, 2008.

Digital Library

[11]

E. Figueiredo et al. Crosscutting patterns and design stability. In Proc. Int. Conf. Program Comprehen., pp. 138--147, 2009.

[12]

E. Figueiredo et al. On the impact of crosscutting concern projection on code measurement. In Proc. Int. Conf. Aspect-oriented Softw. Dev., pp. 81--92, 2011.

Digital Library

[13]

F. Filho et al. Exceptions and aspects: The devil is in the details. In Proc. ACM SIGSOFT Int. Symp. Foundations Softw. Eng., pp. 152--162, 2006.

Digital Library

[14]

A. Garcia et al. Modularizing design patterns with aspects. In Proc. Int. Conf. Aspect-Oriented Softw. Dev., pp. 3--14, 2005.

Digital Library

[15]

D. German. Automating the measurement of open source projects. In Proc Wkshp. Open Source Softw. Eng., pp. 63--67, 2003.

[16]

D. German. An empirical study of fine-grained software modifications. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Softw. Maintenance, pp. 316--325, 2004.

Digital Library

[17]

P. Greenwood et al. On the impact of aspectual decompositions on design stability. In Proc. Europ. Conf. Obj.-Oriented Progr., pp. 176--200, 2007.

Digital Library

[18]

A. Ihara et al. An analysis method for improving a bug modification process in open source software development. In Proc. ACM Int. Wkshp. Princip. Softw. Evol./ERCIM Wkshp. Softw. Evol., pp. 135--144, 2009.

Digital Library

[19]

D. Kelly. A study of design characteristics in evolving software using stability as a criterion. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 32(5):315--329, 2006.

Digital Library

[20]

G. Kiczales et al. Aspect-oriented programming. In Proc. Europ. Conf. Object-Oriented Progr., pp. 220--242, 1997.

[21]

J. Kienzle and S. Gélineau. AO challenge: Implementing the ACID properties for transactional objects. In Proc. Int. Conf. Aspect-Oriented Softw. Devel., pp. 202--213, 2006.

Digital Library

[22]

B. Kitchenham et al. Misleading metrics and unsound analyses. IEEE Softw., 24(2):73--78, 2007.

Digital Library

[23]

M. LaMantia et al. Analyzing the evolution of large-scale software systems using design structure matrices and design rule theory. In Proc. IEEE/IFIP Working Conf. Softw. Arch., pp. 83--92, 2008.

Digital Library

[24]

E. Limpert et al. Log-normal distributions across the sciences. BioScience, 51(5):341--352, 2001.

[25]

R. Lopez-Herrejon and S. Apel. Measuring and characterizing crosscutting in aspect-based programs. In Proc. Int. Conf. Fundamental Approaches Softw. Eng., pp. 423--437, 2007.

Digital Library

[26]

P. Louridas et al. Power laws in software. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol., 18(1):1--26, 2008.

Digital Library

[27]

A. MacCormack et al. Exploring the structure of complex software designs. Manage. Sci., 52(7):1015--1030, 2006.

Digital Library

[28]

M. Marin et al. A classification of crosscutting concerns. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Softw. Mainten., pp. 673--676, 2005.

Digital Library

[29]

M. Marin et al. Documenting typical crosscutting concerns. In Proc. Working Conf. Reverse Eng., pp. 31--40, 2007.

Digital Library

[30]

A. Mockus et al. Two case studies of open source software development. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol., 11(3):309--346, 2002.

Digital Library

[31]

M. Nurolahzade et al. The role of patch review in software evolution. In Proc. ACM Int. Wkshp. Princip. Softw. Evol./ERCIM Wkshp. Softw. Evol., pp. 9--18, 2009.

Digital Library

[32]

D. Parnas. On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Commun. ACM, 15(12):1053--1058, 1972.

Digital Library

[33]

A. Przybyłek. An empirical assessment of the impact of aspect-oriented programming on software modularity. In Proc. Int. Conf. Eval. Novel Approaches Softw. Eng., pp. 139--148, 2010.

[34]

A. Przybyłek. Where the truth lies: AOP and its impact on software modularity. In Proc. Int. Conf. Fundamental Approaches Softw. Eng., pp. 447--461, 2011.

Digital Library

[35]

M. Revelle et al. Understanding concerns in software. In Proc. IEEE Int. Wkshp. Progr. Comprehen., pp. 23--32, 2005.

Digital Library

[36]

J. Siadat et al. Optimization aspects in network simulation. In Proc. Int. Conf. Aspect-Oriented Softw. Dev., pp. 122--133, 2006.

Digital Library

[37]

K. Sullivan et al. The structure and value of modularity in software design. In Proc. Europ. Softw. Eng. Conf./ACM SIGSOFT Int. Symp. Foundations Softw. Eng., pp. 99--108, 2001.

Digital Library

[38]

P. Tarr et al. N degrees of separation: Multi-dimensional separation of concerns. In Proc. Int. Conf. Softw. Eng., pp. 107--119, 1999.

Digital Library

[39]

C. Taube-Schock et al. Can we avoid high coupling? In Proc. Europ. Conf. Object-Oriented Progr., pp. 204--228, 2011.

Digital Library

[40]

S. Yau and J. Collofello. Design stability measures for software maintenance. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 11(9):849--856, 1985.

Digital Library

[41]

C. Zhang and H.-A. Jacobsen. Quantifying aspects in middleware platforms. In Proc. Int. Conf. Aspect-Oriented Softw. Dev., pp. 130--139, 2003.

Digital Library

Cited By

Alshareef SMaatuk AAbdelaziz TAljawarneh S(2022)A Bird’s Eye View on Aspect Oriented Requirements Engineering2022 International Conference on Engineering & MIS (ICEMIS)10.1109/ICEMIS56295.2022.9914074(1-6)Online publication date: 4-Jul-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEMIS56295.2022.9914074
Nascimento RSant'Anna CTrinta FFilho MAndrade RRibeiro M(2017)Investigating the relationship between bad smells and bugs in software systemsProceedings of the 11th Brazilian Symposium on Software Components, Architectures, and Reuse10.1145/3132498.3132513(1-10)Online publication date: 18-Sep-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3132498.3132513
Rocha HValente MMarques-Neto HMurphy G(2016)An Empirical Study on Recommendations of Similar Bugs2016 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering (SANER)10.1109/SANER.2016.87(46-56)Online publication date: Mar-2016
https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER.2016.87
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Do crosscutting concerns cause modularity problems?

Recommendations

Role-based refactoring of crosscutting concerns
Sort-based refactoring of crosscutting concerns to aspects
LATE '08: Proceedings of the 2008 AOSD workshop on Linking aspect technology and evolution

Crosscutting concerns in object-oriented programming hinder evolution because of their symptoms: tangling and scattering. To benefit from the modularisation capabilities for crosscutting concerns provided by aspect-oriented programming (which prevent ...
Toward automated refactoring of crosscutting concerns into aspects

Aspect-oriented programing (AOP) improves the separation of concerns by encapsulating crosscutting concerns into aspects. Thus, aspect-oriented programing aims to better support the evolution of systems. Along this line, we have defined a process that ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

FSE '12: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering

November 2012

494 pages

ISBN:9781450316149

DOI:10.1145/2393596

General Chair:
Will Tracz
Lockheed Martin Fellow Emeritus
,
Program Chairs:
Martin Robillard
McGill University
,
Tevfik Bultan
University of California, Santa Barbara

Copyright © 2012 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 November 2012

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

SIGSOFT/FSE'12

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

SIGSOFT/FSE'12: 20th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering

November 11 - 16, 2012

North Carolina, Cary

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 17 of 128 submissions, 13%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

10
Total Citations
View Citations
240
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)5
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 10 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Alshareef SMaatuk AAbdelaziz TAljawarneh S(2022)A Bird’s Eye View on Aspect Oriented Requirements Engineering2022 International Conference on Engineering & MIS (ICEMIS)10.1109/ICEMIS56295.2022.9914074(1-6)Online publication date: 4-Jul-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEMIS56295.2022.9914074
Nascimento RSant'Anna CTrinta FFilho MAndrade RRibeiro M(2017)Investigating the relationship between bad smells and bugs in software systemsProceedings of the 11th Brazilian Symposium on Software Components, Architectures, and Reuse10.1145/3132498.3132513(1-10)Online publication date: 18-Sep-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3132498.3132513
Rocha HValente MMarques-Neto HMurphy G(2016)An Empirical Study on Recommendations of Similar Bugs2016 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering (SANER)10.1109/SANER.2016.87(46-56)Online publication date: Mar-2016
https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER.2016.87
Tkachuk MNagornyi KGamzayev R(2016)Models, Methods and Tools for Effectiveness Estimation of Post Object-Oriented Technologies in Software MaintenanceInformation and Communication Technologies in Education, Research, and Industrial Applications10.1007/978-3-319-30246-1_2(20-37)Online publication date: 27-Feb-2016
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30246-1_2
Kouroshfar EMirakhorli MBagheri HXiao LMalek SCai YPenta MPinzger MRobbes R(2015)A study on the role of software architecture in the evolution and quality of softwareProceedings of the 12th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories10.5555/2820518.2820548(246-257)Online publication date: 16-May-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2820518.2820548
Figueroa IRobbes RLaToza TAnslow CSunshine J(2015)Is functional programming better for modularity?Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools10.1145/2846680.2846689(49-52)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2846680.2846689
Kouroshfar EMirakhorli MBagheri HXiao LMalek SCai Y(2015)A Study on the Role of Software Architecture in the Evolution and Quality of Software2015 IEEE/ACM 12th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories10.1109/MSR.2015.30(246-257)Online publication date: May-2015
https://doi.org/10.1109/MSR.2015.30
Silva LValente Mde A. Maia M(2015)Co-change Clusters: Extraction and Application on Assessing Software ModularityTransactions on Aspect-Oriented Software Development XII10.1007/978-3-662-46734-3_3(96-131)Online publication date: 20-Mar-2015
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46734-3_3
Silva LValente MMaia MPeternier ABinder WErnst EHirschfeld R(2014)Assessing modularity using co-change clustersProceedings of the 13th international conference on Modularity10.1145/2577080.2577086(49-60)Online publication date: 22-Apr-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2577080.2577086
Kim MZimmermann TNagappan N(2014)An Empirical Study of RefactoringChallenges and Benefits at MicrosoftIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2014.231873440:7(633-649)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TSE.2014.2318734

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents