UMLDiff: an algorithm for object-oriented design differencing

ABSTRACT

This paper presents UMLDiff, an algorithm for automatically detecting structural changes between the designs of subsequent versions of object-oriented software. It takes as input two class models of a Java software system, reverse engineered from two corresponding code versions. It produces as output a change tree, i.e., a tree of structural changes, that reports the differences between the two design versions in terms of (a) additions, removals, moves, renamings of packages, classes, interfaces, fields and methods, (b) changes to their attributes, and (c) changes of the dependencies among these entities. UMLDiff produces an accurate report of the design evolution of the software system, and enables subsequent design-evolution analyses from multiple perspectives in support of various evolution activities. UMLDiff and the analyses it enables can assist software engineers in their tasks of understanding the rationale of design evolution of the software system and planning future development and maintenance activities. We evaluate UMLDiff's correctness and robustness through a real-world case stud.

REFERENCES

• 1: Taweesup Apiwattanapong , Alessandro Orso , Mary Jean Harrold, A Differencing Algorithm for Object-Oriented Programs, Proceedings of the 19th IEEE international conference on Automated software engineering, p.2-13, September 20-24, 2004 [doi>10.1109/ASE.2004.5]
• 2: Serge Demeyer , Stéphane Ducasse , Oscar Nierstrasz, Finding refactorings via change metrics, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, v.35 n.10, p.166-177, Oct. 2000
• 3: Alexander Egyed, Scalable Consistency Checking Between Diagrams-The ViewIntegra Approach, Proceedings of the 16th IEEE international conference on Automated software engineering, p.387, November 26-29, 2001
• 4: Stephen G. Eick , Joseph L. Steffen , Eric E. Sumner, Jr., Seesoft-A Tool for Visualizing Line Oriented Software Statistics, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.18 n.11, p.957-968, November 1992 [doi>10.1109/32.177365 ]
• 5: Stephen G. Eick , Todd L. Graves , Alan F. Karr , J. S. Marron , Audris Mockus, Does Code Decay? Assessing the Evidence from Change Management Data, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.27 n.1, p.1-12, January 2001 [doi>10.1109/32.895984 ]
• 6: Michael Fischer , Martin Pinzger , Harald Gall, Populating a Release History Database from Version Control and Bug Tracking Systems, Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance, p.23, September 22-26, 2003
• 7: Refactoring: improving the design of existing code, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1999
• 8: Michael W. Godfrey , Lijie Zou, Using Origin Analysis to Detect Merging and Splitting of Source Code Entities, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.31 n.2, p.166-181, February 2005 [doi>10.1109/TSE.2005.28]
• 9: Johannes Henkel , Amer Diwan, CatchUp!: capturing and replaying refactorings to support API evolution, Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering, May 15-21, 2005, St. Louis, MO, USA [doi>10.1145/1062455.1062512]
• 10: Susan Horwitz, Identifying the semantic and textual differences between two versions of a program, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1990 conference on Programming language design and implementation, p.234-245, June 1990, White Plains, New York, United States
• 11: Daniel Jackson , David A. Ladd, Semantic Diff: A Tool for Summarizing the Effects of Modifications, Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance, p.243-252, September 01, 1994
• 12: Philippe Kruchten, The 4+1 View Model of Architecture, IEEE Software, v.12 n.6, p.42-50, November 1995 [doi>10.1109/52.469759 ]
• 13: Michele Lanza, The evolution matrix: recovering software evolution using software visualization techniques, Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution, September 10-11, 2001, Vienna, Austria [doi>10.1145/602461.602467]
• 14: M. M. Lehman , L. A. Belady, Program evolution: processes of software change, Academic Press Professional, Inc., San Diego, CA, 1985
• 15: OMG Unified Modeling Language Specification, formal/03-03-01, Version 1.5, (2003), http://www.omg.org.
• 16: Dirk Ohst , Michael Welle , Udo Kelter, Difference Tools for Analysis and Design Documents, Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance, p.13, September 22-26, 2003
• 17: Eduardo Ostertag , James Hendler , Rubén Prieto Díaz , Christine Braun, Computing similarity in a reuse library system: an AI-based approach, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), v.1 n.3, p.205-228, July 1992 [doi>10.1145/131736.131739]
• 18: Barbara G. Ryder , Frank Tip, Change impact analysis for object-oriented programs, Proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT workshop on Program analysis for software tools and engineering, p.46-53, June 2001, Snowbird, Utah, United States [doi>10.1145/379605.379661]
• 19: Filip Van Rysselberghe , Serge Demeyer, Reconstruction of Successful Software Evolution Using Clone Detection, Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution, p.126, September 01-02, 2003
• 20: K Simon, An improved algorithm for transitive closure on acyclic digraphs, International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming on Automata, languages and programming, p.376-386, September 1986, Rennes, France
• 21: G. Spanoudakis and H. Kim. Reconciliation of object interaction models. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Object Oriented Information Systems, pp. 47--58, August 2001.
• 22: Qiang Tu , Michael W. Godfrey, An Integrated Approach for Studying Architectural Evolution, Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Program Comprehension, p.127, June 27-29, 2002
• 23: Understanding Class Evolution in Object-Oriented Software, Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Workshop on Program Comprehension, p.34, June 24-26, 2004
• 24: Zhenchang Xing , Eleni Stroulia, Understanding Phases and Styles of Object-Oriented Systems' Evolution, Proceedings of the 20th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, p.242-251, September 11-14, 2004
• 25: Zhenchang Xing , Eleni Stroulia, Design mentoring based on design evolution analysis, Proceedings of the 2004 OOPSLA workshop on eclipse technology eXchange, p.83-87, October 24-24, 2004, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/1066129.1066146]
• 26: Zhenchang Xing , Eleni Stroulia, Towards Experience-Based Mentoring of Evolutionary Development, Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM'05), p.621-624, September 25-30, 2005 [doi>10.1109/ICSM.2005.95]
• 27: Amy Moormann Zaremski , Jeannette M. Wing, Signature matching: a key to reuse, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT symposium on Foundations of software engineering, p.182-190, December 08-10, 1993, Los Angeles, California, United States
• 28: Eclipse, http://www.eclipse.org
• 29: Mosell EDM Ltd, http://www.deltaxml.com.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.7 Distribution, Maintenance, and Enhancement
          Subjects: Restructuring, reverse engineering, and reengineering

General Terms:
Design

Keywords:
design differencing, design mentoring, design understanding, structural evolution