2013 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) · 2013 · 507 citations · 21 references
ComputingComputer ScienceQuality AssuranceQuality EngineeringSoftware EngineeringDefect DetectionSoftware TestingStatic AnalysisStatic Code AnalysisAutomated Bug FindingStatic Bug Detection
Static analysis tools can automate code inspections, making bug detection faster and cheaper, yet despite these benefits they remain underused by developers. The study examines why developers rarely adopt static analysis tools and explores ways to improve them, including the need for interactive defect‑fixing mechanisms. Interviews with 20 developers revealed that while they see benefits, false positives and poor warning presentation hinder tool adoption.
Using static analysis tools for automating code inspections can be beneficial for software engineers. Such tools can make finding bugs, or software defects, faster and cheaper than manual inspections. Despite the benefits of using static analysis tools to find bugs, research suggests that these tools are underused. In this paper, we investigate why developers are not widely using static analysis tools and how current tools could potentially be improved. We conducted interviews with 20 developers and found that although all of our participants felt that use is beneficial, false positives and the way in which the warnings are presented, among other things, are barriers to use. We discuss several implications of these results, such as the need for an interactive mechanism to help developers fix defects.
21
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
Mik Kersten, Gail C. Murphy · 2005 · 296 citations