Abstract Source code comments are a cornerstone of software documentation facilitating feature development and maintenance. Well-defined documentation formats, like Javadoc, make it easy to include structural metadata used to, for example, generate documentation manuals. However, the actual usage of structural elements in source code comments has not been studied yet. We investigate to which extent these structural elements are used in practice and whether the added information can be leveraged to improve tools assisting developers when writing comments. Existing research on comment generation traditionally focuses on automatic generation of summaries. However, recent works have shown promising results when supporting comment authoring through a next-word prediction. In this paper, we present an in-depth analysis of commenting practice in more than 18K open-source projects written in Python and Java showing that many structural elements, particularly parameter and return value descriptions are indeed widely used. We discover that while a majority are rather short at about 6 to 9 words, many are several hundred words in length. We further find that Python comments tend to be significantly longer than Java comments, possibly due to the weakly-typed nature of the former. Following the empirical analysis, we extend an existing language model with support for structural information, substantially improving the Top-1 accuracy of predicted words (Python 9.6%, Java 7.8%).

Source-code comments are an important communication medium between developers to better understand and maintain software. Current research focuses on auto-generating comments by summarizing the code. However, good comments contain additional details, like important design decisions or required trade-offs, and only developers can decide on the proper comment content. Automated summarization techniques cannot include information that does not exist in the code, therefore fully-automated approaches while helpful, will be of limited use. In our work, we propose to empower developers through a semi-automated system instead. We investigate the feasibility of using neural language models trained on a large corpus of Python documentation strings to generate completion suggestions and obtain promising results. By focusing on confident predictions, we can obtain a top-3 accuracy of over 70%, although this comes at the cost of lower suggestion frequency. Our models can be improved by leveraging context information like the signature and the full body of the method. Additionally, we are able to return good accuracy completions even for new projects, suggesting the generalizability of our approach.

The intense competition characterizing mobile application's marketplaces forces developers to create and maintain high-quality mobile apps in order to ensure their commercial success and acquire new users. This motivated the research community to propose solutions that automate the testing process of mobile apps. However, the main problem of current testing tools is that they generate redundant and random inputs that are insufficient to properly simulate the human behavior, thus leaving feature and crash bugs undetected until they are encountered by users. To cope with this problem, we conjecture that information available in user reviews-that previous work showed as effective for maintenance and evolution problems-can be successfully exploited to identify the main issues users experience while using mobile applications, e.g., GUI problems and crashes. In this paper we provide initial insights into this direction, investigating (i) what type of user feedback can be actually exploited for testing purposes, (ii) how complementary user feedback and automated testing tools are, when detecting crash bugs or errors and (iii) whether an automated system able to monitor crash-related information reported in user feedback is sufficiently accurate. Results of our study, involving 11,296 reviews of 8 mobile applications, show that user feedback can be exploited to provide contextual details about errors or exceptions detected by automated testing tools. Moreover, they also help detecting bugs that would remain uncovered when rely on testing tools only. Finally, the accuracy of the proposed automated monitoring system demonstrates the feasibility of our vision, i.e., integrate user feedback into testing process.

Mobile devices such as smartphones, tablets and wearables are changing the way we do things, radically modifying our approach to technology. To sustain the high competition characterizing the mobile market, developers need to deliver high quality applications in a short release cycle. To reveal and fix bugs as soon as possible, researchers and practitioners proposed tools to automate the testing process. However, such tools generate a high number of redundant inputs, lacking of contextual information and generating reports difficult to analyze. In this context, the content of user reviews represents an unmatched source for developers seeking for defects in their applications. However, no prior work explored the adoption of information available in user reviews for testing purposes. In this demo we present BECLOMA, a tool to enable the integration of user feedback in the testing process of mobile apps. BECLOMA links information from testing tools and user reviews, presenting to developers an augmented testing report combining stack traces with user reviews information referring to the same crash. We show that BECLOMA facilitates not only the diagnosis and fix of app bugs, but also presents additional benefits: it eases the usage of testing tools and automates the analysis of user reviews from the Google Play Store.

Researchers have proposed several approaches to extract information from user reviews useful for maintaining and evolving mobile apps. However, most of them just perform automatic classification of user reviews according to specific keywords (e.g., bugs, features). Moreover, they do not provide any support for linking user feedback to the source code components to be changed, thus requiring a manual, time-consuming, and error-prone task. In this paper, we introduce CHANGEADVISOR, a novel approach that analyzes the structure, semantics, and sentiments of sentences contained in user reviews to extract useful (user) feedback from maintenance perspectives and recommend to developers changes to software artifacts. It relies on natural language processing and clustering algorithms to group user reviews around similar user needs and suggestions for change. Then, it involves textual based heuristics to determine the code artifacts that need to be maintained according to the recommended software changes. The quantitative and qualitative studies carried out on 44,683 user reviews of 10 open source mobile apps and their original developers showed a high accuracy of CHANGEADVISOR in (i) clustering similar user change requests and (ii) identifying the code components impacted by the suggested changes. Moreover, the obtained results show that ChangeAdvisor is more accurate than a baseline approach for linking user feedback clusters to the source code in terms of both precision (+47%) and recall (+38%).

The mobile applications industry experiences an unprecedented high growth, developers working in this context face a fierce competition in acquiring and retaining users. They have to quickly implement new features and fix bugs, or risks losing their users to the competition. To achieve this goal they must closely monitor and analyze the user feedback they receive in form of reviews. However, successful apps can receive up to several thousands of reviews per day, manually analysing each of them is a time consuming task. To help developers deal with the large amount of available data, we manually analyzed the text of 1566 user reviews and defined a high and low level taxonomy containing mobile specific categories (e.g. performance, resources, battery, memory, etc.) highly relevant for developers during the planning of maintenance and evolution activities. Then we built the User Request Referencer (URR) prototype, using Machine Learning and Information Retrieval techniques, to automatically classify reviews according to our taxonomy and recommend for a particular review what are the source code files that need to be modified to handle the issue described in the user review. We evaluated our approach through an empirical study involving the reviews and code of 39 mobile applications. Our results show a high precision and recall of URR in organising reviews according to the defined taxonomy.