现代代码审查背景下的重构实践：Xerox的行业案例研究
Refactoring Practices in the Context of Modern Code Review: An Industrial Case Study at Xerox
摘要：
现代代码审查是工业和开源项目中常用的基本实践，用于提高软件质量，共享知识，并确保符合编码标准。在代码审查期间，开发人员可以在合并代码库中的代码更改之前检查和讨论各种更改，包括重构活动。到目前为止，代码审查已被广泛研究，以探索其一般挑战，最佳实践和结果，以及社会技术方面。然而，很少有人知道重构活动是如何被审查，感知和实践的。本研究旨在揭示评审员如何决定接受或拒绝提交的重构请求，以及是什么使这种评审具有挑战性。我们提出了一个工业案例研究与24个专业开发人员在施乐公司。特别是，我们研究的动机，文档的做法，挑战，验证，并在代码审查重构活动的影响。我们的研究提供了几个重要的发现。我们的结果报告了开发人员在记录重构以供审查时缺乏适当的程序。我们对评审人员的调查也揭示了一些与理解重构意图以及对软件功能和非功能方面的影响有关的困难。根据我们的发现，我们推荐了一个程序来正确记录重构活动，作为我们调查反馈的一部分。
英文摘要：
Modern code review is a common and essential practice employed in both industrial and open-source projects to improve software quality, share knowledge, and ensure conformance with coding standards. During code review, developers may inspect and discuss various changes including refactoring activities before merging code changes in the codebase. To date, code review has been extensively studied to explore its general challenges, best practices and outcomes, and socio-technical aspects. However, little is known about how refactoring activities are being reviewed, perceived, and practiced. This study aims to reveal insights into how reviewers develop a decision about accepting or rejecting a submitted refactoring request, and what makes such review challenging. We present an industrial case study with 24 professional developers at Xerox. Particularly, we study the motivations, documentation practices, challenges, verification, and implications of refactoring activities during code review. Our study delivers several important findings. Our results report the lack of a proper procedure to follow by developers when documenting their refactorings for review. Our survey with reviewers has also revealed several difficulties related to understanding the refactoring intent and implications on the functional and non-functional aspects of the software. In light of our findings, we recommended a procedure to properly document refactoring activities, as part of our survey feedback.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
