AntiCopyPaster 2.0: Whitebox just-in-time code duplicates extraction
Authors: 
Eman Abdullah AlOmar, Benjamin Knobloch, Thomas Kain, Christopher Kalish, Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer, Ali OuniAuthors Info & Claims
Eman Abdullah AlOmar, Benjamin Knobloch, Thomas Kain, Christopher Kalish, Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer, Ali OuniAuthors Info & ClaimsPages 84 - 88
Abstract
AntiCopyPaster is an IntelliJ IDEA plugin, implemented to detect and refactor duplicate code interactively as soon as a duplicate is introduced. The plugin only recommends the extraction of a duplicate when it is worth it. In contrast to current Extract Method refactoring approaches, our tool seamlessly integrates with the developer's workflow and actively provides recommendations for refactorings. This work extends our tool to allow developers to customize the detection rules, i.e., metrics, based on their needs and preferences. The plugin and its source code are publicly available on GitHub at https://github.com/refactorings/anti-copy-paster. The demonstration video can be found on YouTube: https://youtu.be/Y1sbfpds2Ms.
References
[1]
Juan Pablo Sandoval Alcocer, Alejandra Siles Antezana, Gustavo Santos, and Alexandre Bergel. 2020. Improving the success rate of applying the extract method refactoring. Science of Computer Programming 195 (2020), 102475.
[2]
Miltiadis Allamanis. 2019. The adverse effects of code duplication in machine learning models of code. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on New Ideas, New Paradigms, and Reflections on Programming and Software. 143--153.
[3]
Eman Abdullah AlOmar, Anton Ivanov, Zarina Kurbatova, Yaroslav Golubev, Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer, Ali Ouni, Timofey Bryksin, Le Nguyen, Amit Kini, and Aditya Thakur. 2022. AntiCopyPaster: extracting code duplicates as soon as they are introduced in the IDE. In Proceedings of the 37th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering. 1--4.
[4]
Eman Abdullah AlOmar, Anton Ivanov, Zarina Kurbatova, Yaroslav Golubev, Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer, Ali Ouni, Timofey Bryksin, Le Nguyen, Amit Kini, and Aditya Thakur. 2023. Just-in-time code duplicates extraction. Information and Software Technology 158 (2023), 107169.
[5]
Eman Abdullah AlOmar, Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer, Christian Newman, and Ali Ouni. 2021. On preserving the behavior in software refactoring: A systematic mapping study. Information and Software Technology 140 (2021), 106675.
[6]
Eman Abdullah AlOmar, Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer, and Ali Ouni. 2023. Behind the Intent of Extract Method Refactoring: A Systematic Literature Review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2023).
[7]
Mauricio Aniche, Erick Maziero, Rafael Durelli, and Vinicius Durelli. 2020. The effectiveness of supervised machine learning algorithms in predicting software refactoring. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2020).
[8]
Richard Fanta and Václav Rajlich. 1999. Removing clones from the code. Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice 11, 4 (1999), 223--243.
[9]
Francesca Arcelli Fontana, Vincenzo Ferme, Marco Zanoni, and Aiko Yamashita. 2015. Automatic metric thresholds derivation for code smell detection. In 2015 IEEE/ACM 6th International Workshop on Emerging Trends in Software Metrics. IEEE, 44--53.
[10]
Martin Fowler. 2018. Refactoring: improving the design of existing code. Addison-Wesley Professional.
[11]
Roman Haas and Benjamin Hummel. 2016. Deriving extract method refactoring suggestions for long methods. In Int. Conf. on Software Quality. 144--155.
[12]
Keisuke Hotta, Yukiko Sano, Yoshiki Higo, and Shinji Kusumoto. 2010. Is duplicate code more frequently modified than non-duplicate code in software evolution? An empirical study on open source software. In Joint ERCIM Workshop on Software Evolution and Int. Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution (IWPSE). 73--82.
[13]
Cristina V Lopes, Petr Maj, Pedro Martins, Vaibhav Saini, Di Yang, Jakub Zitny, Hitesh Sajnani, and Jan Vitek. 2017. DéjàVu: a map of code duplicates on GitHub. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 1, OOPSLA (2017), 1--28.
[14]
Ali Ouni, Marouane Kessentini, Houari Sahraoui, Katsuro Inoue, and Kalyanmoy Deb. 2016. Multi-criteria code refactoring using search-based software engineering: An industrial case study. TOSEM 25, 3 (2016), 1--53.
[15]
Dhavleesh Rattan, Rajesh Bhatia, and Maninder Singh. 2013. Software clone detection: A systematic review. Information and Software Technology 55, 7 (2013), 1165--1199.
[16]
Mahnoosh Shahidi, Mehrdad Ashtiani, and Morteza Zakeri-Nasrabadi. 2022. An automated extract method refactoring approach to correct the long method code smell. Journal of Systems and Software (2022), 111221.
[17]
Danilo Silva, Ricardo Terra, and Marco Túlio Valente. 2015. Jextract: An eclipse plug-in for recommending automated extract method refactorings. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.06086 (2015).
[18]
Patanamon Thongtanunam, Weiyi Shang, and Ahmed E Hassan. 2019. Will this clone be short-lived? Towards a better understanding of the characteristics of short-lived clones. Empirical Software Engineering 24, 2 (2019), 937--972.
[19]
Omkarendra Tiwari and Rushikesh Joshi. 2022. Identifying Extract Method Refactorings. In 15th Innovations in Software Engineering Conference. 1--11.
[20]
Alexander Trautsch, Fabian Trautsch, and Steffen Herbold. 2021. MSR Mining Challenge: The SmartSHARK Repository Data. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR 2022).
[21]
Nikolaos Tsantalis, Matin Mansouri, Laleh Eshkevari, Davood Mazinanian, and Danny Dig. 2018. Accurate and efficient refactoring detection in commit history. In 2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, 483--494.
[22]
David van der Leij, Jasper Binda, Robbert van Dalen, Pieter Vallen, Yaping Luo, and Mauricio Aniche. 2021. Data-driven extract method recommendations: a study at ING. In ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering. 1337--1347.
[23]
Norihiro Yoshida, Seiya Numata, Eunjong Choiz, and Katsuro Inoue. 2019. Proactive clone recommendation system for extract method refactoring. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 3rd International Workshop on Refactoring (IWoR). IEEE, 67--70.
Index Terms
- AntiCopyPaster 2.0: Whitebox just-in-time code duplicates extraction
Recommendations
AntiCopyPaster: Extracting Code Duplicates As Soon As They Are Introduced in the IDE
ASE '22: Proceedings of the 37th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software EngineeringWe developed a plugin for IntelliJ IDEA called AntiCopyPaster, which tracks the pasting of code fragments inside the IDE and suggests the appropriate Extract Method refactoring to combat the propagation of duplicates. Unlike the existing approaches, our ...
AntiCopyPaster: An Open-Source Ecosystem for Just-in-time Code Duplicates Extraction
SIGCSE 2024: Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2Duplicating a code fragment is the act of copying and pasting it with or without minor modifications into another section of the code base. Despite being an intuitive practice of code reuse, duplicate code brings its own challenges to software ...
Just-in-time code duplicates extraction
Abstract Context:Refactoring is a critical task in software maintenance, and is usually performed to enforce better design and coding practices, while coping with design defects. The Extract Method refactoring is widely used for ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
April 2024
531 pages
ISBN:9798400705021
DOI:10.1145/3639478
- Co-chairs:
- Ana Paiva,
- Rui Abreu,
- Program Co-chairs:
- Abhik Roychoudhury,
- Margaret Storey
Copyright © 2024 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to 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 the author(s) 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
In-Cooperation
- Faculty of Engineering of University of Porto
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 23 May 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
ICSE-Companion '24
Sponsor:
ICSE-Companion '24: 2024 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings
April 14 - 20, 2024
Lisbon, Portugal
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%
Upcoming Conference
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 25Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)25
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6
Reflects downloads up to 10 Aug 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
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.
Sign in