Decision-Making Framework for Refactoring

Marko Leppänen; Samuel Lahtinen; Kati Kuusinen; Simo Mäkinen; Tomi Männistö; Juha Itkonen; Jesse Yli-Huumo; Timo Lehtonen

doi:10.1109/MTD.2015.7332627

Decision-Making Framework for Refactoring

Marko Leppänen, Samuel Lahtinen, Kati Kuusinen, Simo Mäkinen, Tomi Männistö, Juha Itkonen, Jesse Yli-Huumo, Timo Lehtonen

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution › Scientific › peer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Refactoring has been deﬁned as improving code quality without affecting its functionality. When refactoring is overlooked in daily development, the likelihood of larger refactorings increases with time. Disadvantages of larger refactorings include that they disrupt the daily work, require additional planning effort, and often they need to be justiﬁed to stakeholders. In this paper, we investigate with interviews how professionals make refactoring decisions. As a result, we present a framework for decision making for larger refactoring operations describing the key stages in a refactoring workﬂow. Furthermore, one actual industry case of refactoring decision making is presented in detail.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	2015 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD)
Publisher	IEEE
Pages	61-68
Number of pages	8
ISBN (Electronic)	978-1-4673-7378-4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1109/MTD.2015.7332627
Publication status	Published - 2 Oct 2015
Publication type	A4 Article in a conference publication
Event	International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt - Duration: 1 Jan 1900 → …

Conference

Conference	International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt
Period	1/01/00 → …

Publication forum classification

Publication forum level 1

Access to Document

10.1109/MTD.2015.7332627

Cite this

@inproceedings{1efc644f340946e7aacfdb24d36e36c4,

title = "Decision-Making Framework for Refactoring",

abstract = "Refactoring has been deﬁned as improving code quality without affecting its functionality. When refactoring is overlooked in daily development, the likelihood of larger refactorings increases with time. Disadvantages of larger refactorings include that they disrupt the daily work, require additional planning effort, and often they need to be justiﬁed to stakeholders. In this paper, we investigate with interviews how professionals make refactoring decisions. As a result, we present a framework for decision making for larger refactoring operations describing the key stages in a refactoring workﬂow. Furthermore, one actual industry case of refactoring decision making is presented in detail.",

author = "Marko Lepp{\"a}nen and Samuel Lahtinen and Kati Kuusinen and Simo M{\"a}kinen and Tomi M{\"a}nnist{\"o} and Juha Itkonen and Jesse Yli-Huumo and Timo Lehtonen",

year = "2015",

month = oct,

day = "2",

doi = "10.1109/MTD.2015.7332627",

language = "English",

pages = "61--68",

booktitle = "2015 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD)",

publisher = "IEEE",

note = "International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt ; Conference date: 01-01-1900",

}

Decision-Making Framework for Refactoring. / Leppänen, Marko; Lahtinen, Samuel; Kuusinen, Kati; Mäkinen, Simo; Männistö, Tomi; Itkonen, Juha; Yli-Huumo, Jesse; Lehtonen, Timo.

2015 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD). IEEE, 2015. p. 61-68.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution › Scientific › peer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - Decision-Making Framework for Refactoring

AU - Leppänen, Marko

AU - Lahtinen, Samuel

AU - Kuusinen, Kati

AU - Mäkinen, Simo

AU - Männistö, Tomi

AU - Itkonen, Juha

AU - Yli-Huumo, Jesse

AU - Lehtonen, Timo

PY - 2015/10/2

Y1 - 2015/10/2

N2 - Refactoring has been deﬁned as improving code quality without affecting its functionality. When refactoring is overlooked in daily development, the likelihood of larger refactorings increases with time. Disadvantages of larger refactorings include that they disrupt the daily work, require additional planning effort, and often they need to be justiﬁed to stakeholders. In this paper, we investigate with interviews how professionals make refactoring decisions. As a result, we present a framework for decision making for larger refactoring operations describing the key stages in a refactoring workﬂow. Furthermore, one actual industry case of refactoring decision making is presented in detail.

AB - Refactoring has been deﬁned as improving code quality without affecting its functionality. When refactoring is overlooked in daily development, the likelihood of larger refactorings increases with time. Disadvantages of larger refactorings include that they disrupt the daily work, require additional planning effort, and often they need to be justiﬁed to stakeholders. In this paper, we investigate with interviews how professionals make refactoring decisions. As a result, we present a framework for decision making for larger refactoring operations describing the key stages in a refactoring workﬂow. Furthermore, one actual industry case of refactoring decision making is presented in detail.

U2 - 10.1109/MTD.2015.7332627

DO - 10.1109/MTD.2015.7332627

M3 - Conference contribution

SP - 61

EP - 68

BT - 2015 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD)

PB - IEEE

T2 - International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt

Y2 - 1 January 1900

ER -

Decision-Making Framework for Refactoring

Abstract

Conference

Publication forum classification

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this