ComputingComputer ScienceQuality AssuranceQuality EngineeringSoftware EngineeringSoftware MaintenanceSoftware MetricsSoftware TestingStatic Code AnalysisAutomated Bug FindingBug FixingBug Pattern DetectionBug TrackingDataset CurationDebuggingSoftware DebuggingSoftware Quality Measurement
In May 2009, Google conducted a company wide FindBugs "fixit". Hundreds of engineers reviewed thousands of FindBugs warnings, and fixed or filed reports against many of them. In this paper, we discuss the lessons learned from this exercise, and analyze the resulting dataset, which contains data about how warnings in each bug pattern were classified. Significantly, we observed that even though most issues were flagged for fixing, few appeared to be causing any serious problems in production. This suggests that most interesting software quality problems were eventually found and fixed without FindBugs, but FindBugs could have found these problems early, when they are cheap to remediate. We compared this observation to bug trends observed in code snapshots from student projects.
15
David Hovemeyer, William Pugh · 2004 · 775 citations
A few billion lines of code later
Al Bessey, Ken Block, Ben Chelf et al. · Communications of the ACM · 2010 · 624 citations
Using Static Analysis to Find Bugs
Nathaniel Ayewah, William Pugh, David Hovemeyer et al. · IEEE Software · 2008 · 522 citations
Computing, Computer Science, Secure Software Development +14
Which warnings should I fix first?
Sunghun Kim, Michael D. Ernst · 2007 · 203 citations