diagnosis and semi-automatic correction of detected design inconsistencies in source code
Post on 17-Dec-2014
336 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Diagnosis and semi-automatic correction of
detected design inconsistencies in source code
Sergio CastroRELEASeD lab
Université catholique de Louvainsergio.castro@uclouvain.be
Advisor: Kim Mens
1
1Monday 31 August 2009
An inconsistency example
AbstractAction
- (abstract) perform- isUndoable
^false.
- perform- isUndoable
^true.
- perform- undoAction
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^aBlock value.
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^true.
2
Dummy
Action
Experimental
Action
DrawAction QueryAction
2Monday 31 August 2009
An inconsistency example
AbstractAction
- (abstract) perform- isUndoable
^false.
- perform- isUndoable
^true.
- perform- undoAction
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^aBlock value.
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^true.
2
Dummy
Action
Experimental
Action
DrawAction QueryAction
The command design pattern
2Monday 31 August 2009
An inconsistency example
AbstractAction
- (abstract) perform- isUndoable
^false.
- perform- isUndoable
^true.
- perform- undoAction
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^aBlock value.
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^true.
2
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
Dummy
Action
Experimental
Action
DrawAction QueryAction
The command design pattern
2Monday 31 August 2009
An inconsistency example
AbstractAction
- (abstract) perform- isUndoable
^false.
- perform- isUndoable
^true.
- perform- undoAction
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^aBlock value.
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^true.
2
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
Dummy
Action
Experimental
Action
DrawAction QueryAction
The command design pattern
2Monday 31 August 2009
An inconsistency example
AbstractAction
- (abstract) perform- isUndoable
^false.
- perform- isUndoable
^true.
- perform- undoAction
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^aBlock value.
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^true.
2
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
Dummy
Action
Experimental
Action
DrawAction QueryAction
- isUndoable^true.
The command design pattern
2Monday 31 August 2009
An inconsistency example
AbstractAction
- (abstract) perform- isUndoable
^false.
- perform- isUndoable
^true.
- perform- undoAction
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^aBlock value.
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^true.
2
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
Dummy
Action
Experimental
Action
DrawAction QueryAction
- isUndoable^true.
- undoAction
The command design pattern
2Monday 31 August 2009
An inconsistency example
AbstractAction
- (abstract) perform- isUndoable
^false.
- perform- isUndoable
^true.
- perform- undoAction
- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^aBlock value.?- perform- undoAction- isUndoable
^true.
2
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
Dummy
Action
Experimental
Action
DrawAction QueryAction
- isUndoable^true.
- undoAction
The command design pattern
2Monday 31 August 2009
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
User-defined consistency
An inconsistency exampleThe command design pattern
3
3Monday 31 August 2009
Inconsistency management activities
Predefined consistencydefinitions
Inconsistency detection
Diagnosing
Correcting
Many tools offering support for management of predefined
consistencies.
Such as Lint, CheckStyle, etc
4
4Monday 31 August 2009
Inconsistency management activities
User-definedconsistency definitions
Inconsistency detection
Diagnosing
Correcting
We propose a general approach for the management of user-defined consistencies.
5
5Monday 31 August 2009
Inconsistency management activities
Inconsistency detection
Diagnosing
Correcting
} IntensiVE
} Corrective framework
Explaining abnormal observations and
suggesting corrective actions
Defining and verifying consistency rules
6
Already used for inconsistency management in other areas of SE (e.g.,
requirements engineering, UML modelling, data bases)
User-definedconsistency definitions
6Monday 31 August 2009
Inconsistency management activities
Inconsistency detection
Diagnosing
Correcting
} IntensiVE
} Corrective framework
Explaining abnormal observations and
suggesting corrective actions
Defining and verifying consistency rules
6
Already used for inconsistency management in other areas of SE (e.g.,
requirements engineering, UML modelling, data bases)
( http://www.intensive.be )
User-definedconsistency definitions
6Monday 31 August 2009
7
IntensiVE
( http://www.intensive.be )
Inconsistency detection
User-definedconsistency definitions
7Monday 31 August 2009
Defining and verifying constraints using IntensiVE
• Many kind of checks.
• Defined as relationships among sets of source code elements.
• Sets are intensionally defined and referred as Intensional Views.
8
with queries over source code
8Monday 31 August 2009
View with classes returning
true in the isUndoable
method
View with classes
implementing the undoAction
method
Verification of the Undoable Actions constraint
9
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
9Monday 31 August 2009
View with classes returning
true in the isUndoable
method
View with classes
implementing the undoAction
method
Verification of the Undoable Actions constraintQUERY:
classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWithName(?class,?method,isUndoable),
methodReturnsBoolean(?method,[true])
9
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
9Monday 31 August 2009
View with classes returning
true in the isUndoable
method
View with classes
implementing the undoAction
method
Verification of the Undoable Actions constraintQUERY:
classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWithName(?class,?method,isUndoable),
methodReturnsBoolean(?method,[true])
QUERY:classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWith
Name(?class,?,undoAction)
9
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
9Monday 31 August 2009
View with classes returning
true in the isUndoable
method
View with classes
implementing the undoAction
method
If consistent, any class in the first view should be also in the
second, and vice versa
Verification of the Undoable Actions constraintQUERY:
classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWithName(?class,?method,isUndoable),
methodReturnsBoolean(?method,[true])
QUERY:classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWith
Name(?class,?,undoAction)
9
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
9Monday 31 August 2009
Verification of alternative views
AbstractAddAction
AddClassificationAction
ExperimentalAction
View with classes returning true in the isUndoable method
View with classes implementing the
undoAction method
AbstractAddAction
AddClassificationAction
QUERY:classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWith
Name(?class,?method,isUndoable), methodReturnsBoolean(?method,[true])
QUERY:classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWith
Name(?class,?,undoAction)
10
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
10Monday 31 August 2009
Verification of alternative views
AbstractAddAction
AddClassificationAction
ExperimentalAction
View with classes returning true in the isUndoable method
View with classes implementing the
undoAction method
AbstractAddAction
AddClassificationAction
?
QUERY:classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWith
Name(?class,?method,isUndoable), methodReturnsBoolean(?method,[true])
QUERY:classChainReallyUnderstandsMethodWith
Name(?class,?,undoAction)
10
Consistency property:! Action, an undoAction method should be provided
⇔ the isUndoable method returns true
10Monday 31 August 2009
IntensiVE(consistency checking)
11
11Monday 31 August 2009
IntensiVE(consistency checking)
{
11
Classes that return true in the isUndoable method
11Monday 31 August 2009
IntensiVE(consistency checking)
{ {
11
Classes that return true in the isUndoable method
Classes that implement the
undoAction method
11Monday 31 August 2009
IntensiVE(consistency checking)
12
This class does not return true at the
isUndoable method
But implements an undoAction method
12Monday 31 August 2009
IntensiVE(consistency checking)
12
This class does not return true at the
isUndoable method
But implements an undoAction method
ExperimentalAction
12Monday 31 August 2009
IntensiVE(diagnosing inconsistencies)
13
Why ExperimentalAction is
not a result of the query defining this set?
OR: Why ExperimentalAction is a result of the query defining
this set?
ExperimentalAction
13Monday 31 August 2009
Inconsistency management activities
Inconsistency detection
Diagnosing
Correcting
} IntensiVE
} Corrective framework
Explaining abnormal observations and
suggesting corrective actions
Defining and verifying consistency rules
14
Already used for inconsistency management in other areas of SE (e.g.,
requirements engineering, UML modelling, data bases)
( http://www.intensive.be )
User-definedconsistency definitions
14Monday 31 August 2009
Corrective framework
15
Diagnosing
Correcting
15Monday 31 August 2009
What is diagnosis?
16
Generating hypotheses explaining abnormal
observations
Abductive reasoning
16Monday 31 August 2009
What is diagnosis?
16
Generating hypotheses explaining abnormal
observations
Abductive reasoning
16Monday 31 August 2009
What is diagnosis?
16
Generating hypotheses explaining abnormal
observations
Abductive reasoning
one of the fundamental forms of
human reasoning according to Pierce
16Monday 31 August 2009
Abduction is suitable for
• Generating hypotheses that would explain an evidence.
• Explanations expressed in terms of certain predicates, declared before hand as abducibles.
17
17Monday 31 August 2009
Abduction is suitable for
• Generating hypotheses that would explain an evidence.
• Explanations expressed in terms of certain predicates, declared before hand as abducibles.
17
False predicates
that could be true
17Monday 31 August 2009
Abduction is suitable for
• Generating hypotheses that would explain an evidence.
• Explanations expressed in terms of certain predicates, declared before hand as abducibles.
17
True predicates
that could be false
False predicates
that could be true
17Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
Abduction is suitable for
• Generating hypotheses that would explain an evidence.
• Explanations expressed in terms of certain predicates, declared before hand as abducibles.
17
True predicates
that could be false
False predicates
that could be true
We can think in “Abducibles” as “Correctables”
17Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
18
18Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
18
Observation:
flies(opus)
18Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
18
Observation:
flies(opus)
failing
18Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
18
Observation:
flies(opus)
bird(opus)added to
our theory
failing
18Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
18
Observation:
flies(opus)
bird(opus)added to
our theory
succeeding
18Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
bird(tweety)
broken-wing(tweety)
19
19Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
bird(tweety)
broken-wing(tweety)
19
Observation:
flies(tweety)
19Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
bird(tweety)
broken-wing(tweety)
19
Observation:
flies(tweety)
failing
19Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
bird(tweety)
broken-wing(tweety)
19
Observation:
flies(tweety)
retracted from our theory
failing
19Monday 31 August 2009
Abducibles
bird(?x).
broken-wing(?x).
An example of abduction
Theory:
flies(?x) if bird(?x), not (ab(?x))
ab(?x) if broken-wing(?x)
bird(tweety)
broken-wing(tweety)
19
Observation:
flies(tweety)
retracted from our theory
succeeding
19Monday 31 August 2009
How to choose abducible predicates
?-classChainReallyUnderstandMethodWithName(ExperimentalAction, ?m, undoAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
:-superclassOf(?s, ExperimentalAction),
classChainReallyUnderstandMethodWithName(?s, ?m, undoAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
:-methodWithNameInClass(?m, undoAction, ExperimentalAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
20
- predicates that denote basic structural relationships- we know for sure that they will be evaluated as part of the resolution process of the query
20Monday 31 August 2009
How to choose abducible predicates
?-classChainReallyUnderstandMethodWithName(ExperimentalAction, ?m, undoAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
:-superclassOf(?s, ExperimentalAction),
classChainReallyUnderstandMethodWithName(?s, ?m, undoAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
:-methodWithNameInClass(?m, undoAction, ExperimentalAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
20
Primitive predicates that can be corrected
- predicates that denote basic structural relationships- we know for sure that they will be evaluated as part of the resolution process of the query
20Monday 31 August 2009
?-classChainReallyUnderstandMethodWithName(ExperimentalAction, ?m, undoAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
:-superclassOf(?s, ExperimentalAction),
classChainReallyUnderstandMethodWithName(?s, ?m, undoAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
:-methodWithNameInClass(?m, undoAction, ExperimentalAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
21
Primitive predicates that can be corrected
How to choose abducible predicates
21Monday 31 August 2009
?-classChainReallyUnderstandMethodWithName(ExperimentalAction, ?m, undoAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
:-superclassOf(?s, ExperimentalAction),
classChainReallyUnderstandMethodWithName(?s, ?m, undoAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
:-methodWithNameInClass(?m, undoAction, ExperimentalAction),
methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(?m, true)
21
Primitive predicates that can be corrected
How to choose abducible predicates
21Monday 31 August 2009
Our framework allows ...
• The definition of abducible predicates.
• Declaration of multiple corrective actions.
• Generation of hypotheses explaining inconsistencies.
• Semi-automatic execution of corrective actions.
22
22Monday 31 August 2009
Defining positive explanations(new facts will be added to the theory)
23
23Monday 31 August 2009
Defining positive explanations(new facts will be added to the theory)
23
Abducible predicate:in(methodWithBooleanReturnStatement(+?
method,+?boolean))
23Monday 31 August 2009
Defining positive explanations(new facts will be added to the theory)
24
24Monday 31 August 2009
Defining positive explanations(new facts will be added to the theory)
24
Corrective action:[[?class compile: (?selector asString, ‘^’,?boolean
asString)]]
24Monday 31 August 2009
Correcting inconsistencies
25
25Monday 31 August 2009
Correcting inconsistencies
25
Correct
25Monday 31 August 2009
The corrective browser
26
26Monday 31 August 2009
The corrective browser
26
Corrective action name
26Monday 31 August 2009
The corrective browser
26
Corrective action name
Textual description
26Monday 31 August 2009
The corrective browser
26
Corrective action name
Textual description
Visualization in the proof three of where the
corrective action was found
26Monday 31 August 2009
Visualisation of the nodes with corrective actions
27
Color code:•Red filling means failure.
•Thick green border means availability of corrective
actions.
27Monday 31 August 2009
Visualisation of the nodes with corrective actions
27
Color code:•Red filling means failure.
•Thick green border means availability of corrective
actions.
27Monday 31 August 2009
Future work
• How to choose among different solutions.
• Detect solutions that could cause new inconsistencies.
28
28Monday 31 August 2009
Conclusions
• We can infer solutions from the rules that define consistencies.
• A library of “primitive” solutions to small problems should be provided.
• These solutions can be composed and reused across distinct problems.
29
29Monday 31 August 2009
Many Thanks !
Questions and feedback are welcomed
30
30Monday 31 August 2009
top related