臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

　　物件導向的軟體開發方式在近年逐漸受到重視，為了能夠有比較好的方式來評估並且控制物件導向軟體系統的品質，於是有許多物件導向設計度量被提出， 希望能夠在軟體設計的階段，就藉由物件導向設計度量來模型一些會影響到軟體品質的物件導向設計的特性，並且藉由這樣的設計度量得到一些軟體品質評估的方法。我們所主要針對的是實務去探討物件類別的信賴度與一個比較好的物件導向設計複雜度的關聯性，並且藉由幾個開放原始碼的軟體專案來做這樣的實務研究，除此之外，最後利用軟體視覺化的方法來呈現物件類別信賴度與設計複雜度之間的關係。最後的結果顯示物件導向設計複雜度可以做為是物件類別信賴度的一個指標。

　The object-oriented paradigm has become popular in recent years. In order to better evaluate and
control the quality of object-oriented software system, many object-oriented design metrics proposed to model the design properties that influence software quality during design phase. Many new metrics have been proposed, but only a few of them have been validated. The major focus of our work is to empirically investigate the relationship between class defect count and a better existing design complexity metric, Interaction Level (IL). Several open source projects are studied to perform such investigation. In addition, we also present the relationship between design complexity metric and class defect count by using software visualization technique. The result shows this metric can be a useful reliability indicator at the class level.

Table of Contents
Chapter1
Introduction ...............................................1

Chapter2
RelatedWork ................................................4

Chapter3
Interaction Level Metric ...................................9

3.1 ConceptualModel of Interaction Level ...................9
3.2 Definition of Interaction Level ....................... 10
3.3 Example ................................................12

Chapter4
ModelandHypotheses......................................... 15

Chapter5
Experiment Analysis ........................................21

5.1 Dependent and Independent Variables ....................22
5.2 Experimental Subjects ..................................23
5.3 AnalysisMethod .........................................25
5.3.1 P-Value ..............................................26
5.3.2 R-square value .......................................26
5.4 Experimental Result ....................................26
5.4.1 Influence of IL ......................................27
5.4.2 Influence of CBO .....................................27
5.4.3 Discussion of Result .................................28
5.5 Threats to Validity ....................................31

Chapter6 Implementation ....................................33

6.1 Functionality ......................................... 33
6.2 Visualization Results ..................................35
6.3 Summary ................................................39
6.3.1 FormalMethods ........................................40

7 Conclusion and Future Work ...............................42

Appendix ...................................................44
A Description Statistics ...................................44

References .................................................46
Vita .......................................................49

[1] T. J. McCabe, “A complexity measure,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 308–320, Dec. 1976.

[2] I. Sommerville, Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, 6 ed., 2000.

[3] V. Y. Shen, T.-J. Yu, S. M. Thebaut, and L. R. Paulsen, “Identifying error-prone software: an empirical study,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 317–324, April 1985.

[4] G. K. Gill and C. F. Kemerer, “Cyclomatic complexity density and software maintenance productivity,”IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 1284–1288, Dec. 1991.

[5] V. R. Basili, L. C. Briand, and W. L. Melo, “A validation of object-oriented design metrics as quality indicators,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 751–761, Oct. 1996.

[6] R. Subramanyam and M. Krishnan, “Empirical analysis of ck metrics for object-oriented design complexity: Implications for software defects,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 297–310, April 2003.

[7] D. H. Abbott, T. D. Korson, and J. D. McGregor, “A design complexity metric for object-oriented development,” Tech. Rep. 94-105, Department of Computer Science, Clemson University, 1994.

[8] R. K. Bandi, V. K. Vaishnavi, and D. E. Turk, “Predicting maintenance performance using objectoriented design complexity metrics,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 29, no. 1, Jan. 2003.

[9] B. Price, R. Baecker, and I. Small, “An introduction to software visualization,” in Software visualization (M. H. B. John T. Stasko, John B. Domingue and B. A. Price, eds.), pp. 4–26, MIT Press, 1998.

[10] S. R. Chidamber and C. F. Kemerer, “A metrics suite for object oriented design,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 476–493, June 1994.

[11] W. Li and S. Henry, “Object-oriented metrics that predict maintainabillity,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 111–122, Nov. 1993.

[12] S. R. Chidamber, D. P. Darcy, and C. F. Kemerer, “Managerial use of metrics for object-oriented software: An exploratory analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 629–639, Aug. 1998.

[13] L. C. Briand, J. Wust, S. V. Ikonomovski, and H. Lounis, “Investigating quality factors in objectoriented designs: An industrial case study,” Proceedings of the 21st international conference on Software engineering, pp. 345–354, 1999.

[14] S. Ducasse and M. Lanza, “The class blueprint: Visually supporting the understanding of classes,”IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 75–90, Jan. 2005.

[15] L. C. Briand, J. Wust, S. V. Ikonomovski, and H. Lounis, “Exploring the relationship between design measurements and software quality in object oriented systems,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 245–273, May 2000.

[16] E. Gamma, R. Helm, R. Johnson, and J. Vlissides, Design patterns : elements of reusable objectoriented software. Addison-Wesley professional computing series, Addison-Wesley, 1995.

[17] “Apache software foundation.” http://www.apache.org.

[18] “Apache software foundation bug system." http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/.

[19] “Java reflection.” http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/guide/reflection/.

[20] D. Jackson, “Abstract analysis with aspect,” Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Software testing and analysis, pp. 19–27, June 1993.

[21] W. E. Howden, “Comments analysis and programming errors,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 72–81, Jan. 1990.

[22] M. Chechik and J. Gannon, “Automatic analysis of consistency between requirements and designs,”IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 651–672, July 2001.