Understanding Practitioners' Expectations on Clear Code Review Comments
Fuente:
arXiv
Enregistré dans:
| Auteurs principaux: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Publié: |
2024
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866908335459008512 |
|---|---|
| author | Chen, Junkai Li, Zhenhao Mao, Qiheng Hu, Xing Liu, Kui Xia, Xin |
| author_facet | Chen, Junkai Li, Zhenhao Mao, Qiheng Hu, Xing Liu, Kui Xia, Xin |
| contents | The code review comment (CRC) is pivotal in the process of modern code review. It provides reviewers with the opportunity to identify potential bugs, offer constructive feedback, and suggest improvements. Clear and concise code review comments (CRCs) facilitate the communication between developers and are crucial to the correct understanding of the identified issues and proposed solutions. Despite the importance of CRCs' clarity, there is still a lack of guidelines on what constitutes a good clarity and how to evaluate it. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive study on understanding and evaluating the clarity of CRCs. We first derive a set of attributes related to the clarity of CRCs, namely RIE attributes (i.e., Relevance, Informativeness, and Expression), as well as their corresponding evaluation criteria based on our literature review and survey with practitioners. We then investigate the clarity of CRCs in open-source projects written in nine programming languages and find that a large portion (i.e., 28.8%) of the CRCs lack the clarity in at least one of the attributes. Finally, we explore the potential of automatically evaluating the clarity of CRCs by proposing ClearCRC. Experimental results show that ClearCRC with pre-trained language models is promising for effective evaluation of the clarity of CRCs, achieving a balanced accuracy up to 73.04% and a F-1 score up to 94.61%. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2410_06515 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Understanding Practitioners' Expectations on Clear Code Review Comments Chen, Junkai Li, Zhenhao Mao, Qiheng Hu, Xing Liu, Kui Xia, Xin Software Engineering The code review comment (CRC) is pivotal in the process of modern code review. It provides reviewers with the opportunity to identify potential bugs, offer constructive feedback, and suggest improvements. Clear and concise code review comments (CRCs) facilitate the communication between developers and are crucial to the correct understanding of the identified issues and proposed solutions. Despite the importance of CRCs' clarity, there is still a lack of guidelines on what constitutes a good clarity and how to evaluate it. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive study on understanding and evaluating the clarity of CRCs. We first derive a set of attributes related to the clarity of CRCs, namely RIE attributes (i.e., Relevance, Informativeness, and Expression), as well as their corresponding evaluation criteria based on our literature review and survey with practitioners. We then investigate the clarity of CRCs in open-source projects written in nine programming languages and find that a large portion (i.e., 28.8%) of the CRCs lack the clarity in at least one of the attributes. Finally, we explore the potential of automatically evaluating the clarity of CRCs by proposing ClearCRC. Experimental results show that ClearCRC with pre-trained language models is promising for effective evaluation of the clarity of CRCs, achieving a balanced accuracy up to 73.04% and a F-1 score up to 94.61%. |
| title | Understanding Practitioners' Expectations on Clear Code Review Comments |
| topic | Software Engineering |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.06515 |