Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Jake Iannacone

dblp:204/3747 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 50% Software maintenance and evolution · 50%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering
developer studies
0.312017
Understanding misunderstandings in source code · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2017
Software maintenance and evolution
program comprehension
0.312017
Understanding misunderstandings in source code · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2017

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

empirical study · 0.3controlled experiment · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2017 Understanding misunderstandings in source code
abstract
Humans often mistake the meaning of source code, and so misjudge a program's true behavior. These mistakes can be caused by extremely small, isolated patterns in code, which can lead to significant runtime errors. These patterns are used in large, popular software projects and even recommended in style guides. To identify code patterns that may confuse programmers we extracted a preliminary set of `atoms of confusion' from known confusing code. We show empirically in an experiment with 73 participants that these code patterns can lead to a significantly increased rate of misunderstanding versus equivalent code without the patterns. We then go on to take larger confusing programs and measure (in an experiment with 43 participants) the impact, in terms of programmer confusion, of removing these confusing patterns. All of our instruments, analysis code, and data are publicly available online for replication, experimentation, and feedback.
Daniel Gopstein, Jake Iannacone, Lois DeLong, Yanyan Zhuang, Martin K.-C. Yeh, Justin Cappos
ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE2