A Survey of Software and Code Inspection Tools

1
A Survey of Software and Code Inspection Tools

• Steve Renick

2
Software Inspection Process
3
Collaborative SI Tools

• Internet Based Inspection System (IBIS)
• Collaborative Software Inspection (CSI)
• Both Support
• Collaborative and Distributed SI
• Synchronous and Asynchronous SI

4
IBIS

• Jointly developed University of Bari, University
  of Sannio
• Ideas from collaborative open- source projects
• Web Browsers
• E-mail clients.

5
IBIS Architecture
6
IBIS

• Reengineered Preparation and Meeting
• Discovery
• Collection
• Discrimination

7
SI Using IBIS

• Planning
• Overview
• Discovery
• Collection
• Discrimination
• Rework
• Follow-up

8
IBIS
9
IBIS Conclusions

• Advantages
• Handles pictures assumption.
• Uses common internet technologies.
• Disadvantages
• Only directly support the checklist reading
  technique.

10
CSI

• Developed at U. of Minn. Minneapolis.
• Supports variants of Fagans SI
• Yurdon technique.
• Humphrey technique.

11
CSI

• Planning asynchronous.
• Preparation asynchronous.
• Meeting synchronous.
• Follow-up asynchronous.

12
CSI Components
13
CSI
14
CSI Conclusion

• Older technology.
• Unix based.
• Custom components.
• SI target must be text based.

15
Code Analysis Tools

• Common Features
• Default set of rules.
• User can choose which ruled to ignore.
• User defined rules.
• IDE-like user interface.

16
JStyle
17
JStyle

• Fast!
• Custom rules with JMScript and VBScript.
• Decent documentation.
• Poor categorization.

18
JStyle
19
QStudio
20
QStudio

• Slow.
• Custom rules implemented using PMD specification.
• Sub-standard documentation.
• Complicated categorization.
• No reporting or summarizing (evaluation version).

21
AppPerfect
22
AppPerfect

• Fast enough.
• Custom rules implemented using tags.
• Excellent documentation.
• Excellent categorization.

23
Comparison

• Open source Azureus Project.
• BitTorrent client written in Java.
• Details
• 875 files.
• 168 packages.
• 7440 methods.
• 7931 LOC.

24
Comparison
25
Conclusion

• Need better tools (only source code inspection is
  automated).
• Use collaborative and code inspection tools
  together.

26
Conclusion
CI Tool
Code Inspection Tool
Planning
Overview
Preparation
Meeting
Entry Criteria
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Author
Author
Inspectors
Author
Inspectors
Reader
Recorder
Inspectors
Rework
Follow
-
up
Author
Moderator
Author
Exit
Criteria
27
References

• Ackerman, A. Frank, Software Inspections and the
  cost Effective Production of Reliable Software,
  Software Engineering, Volume 2 The Supporting
  Processes, John Wiley Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New
  Jersey, 2003, pp. 117 - 137.
•  
• Lanubile, Fillipo, and Mallardo, Teresa, Tool
  Support for Distributed Inspection, 26th Annual
  Intnl. Computer Software and Applications
  Conference, Oxford, England, 2002, pp. 1076
  1081.
•  
• Mashayekhi, Vahid, et. al., Distributed,
  Collaborative Software Inspection, IEEE
  Software, September 1993, pp. 66 75.
•  
• Java Code Review JStyle (Man Machine Systems)
  http//www.mmsindia.com/jstyle.html
•  
• AppPerfect Agentless Monitor, Code Analyzer,
  Profiler, Load Tester, Functional Tester for Java
  and J2EE http//www.appperfect.com/index.html
•  
• QA Systems / Product / QStudio for Java
• http//www.qa-systems.com/products/qstudioforjava/
  index.html