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

Matthew Coley

dblp:269/7995 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—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
Software testing · 77% Software maintenance and evolution · 23%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › test maintenance
test isolation
0.412020
Debugging the performance of Maven's test isolation: experience report · ISSTA 2020
Software maintenance and evolution
build systems
0.112020
Debugging the performance of Maven's test isolation: experience report · ISSTA 2020
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Debugging the performance of Maven's test isolation: experience report
abstract
Testing is the most common approach used in industry for checking software correctness. Developers frequently practice reliable testing-executing individual tests in isolation from each other-to avoid test failures caused by test-order dependencies and shared state pollution (e.g., when tests mutate static fields). A common way of doing this is by running each test as a separate process. Unfortunately, this is known to introduce substantial overhead. This experience report describes our efforts to better understand the sources of this overhead and to create a system to confirm the minimal overhead possible. We found that different build systems use different mechanisms for communicating between these multiple processes, and that because of this design decision, running tests with some build systems could be faster than with others. Through this inquiry we discovered a significant performance bug in Apache Maven’s test running code, which slowed down test execution by on average 350 milliseconds per-test when compared to a competing build system, Ant. When used for testing real projects, this can result in a significant reduction in testing time. We submitted a patch for this bug which has been integrated into the Apache Maven build system, and describe our ongoing efforts to improve Maven’s test execution tooling.
Pengyu Nie 0001, Ahmet Çelik, Matthew Coley, Aleksandar Milicevic, Jonathan Bell 0001, Milos Gligoric 0001
ISSTA3