skip to main content


This content will become publicly available on June 1, 2025

Title: Prevalence and severity of design anti-patterns in open source programs—A large-scale study
Context: Design anti-patterns can be symptoms of problems that lead to long-term maintenance difficulty. How should development teams prioritize their treatment? Which ones are more severe and deserve more attention? Does the impact of anti-patterns and general maintenance efforts differ with different programming languages? Objective: In this study, we assess the prevalence and severity of anti-patterns in different programming languages and the impact of dynamic typing in Python, as well as the impact scopes of prevalent anti-patterns that manifest the violation of design principles. Method: We conducted a large-scale study of anti-patterns using 1717 open-source projects written in Java, C/C++, and Python. For the 288 Python projects, we extracted both explicit and dynamic dependencies and compared how the detected anti-patterns and maintenance costs changed. Finally, we removed anti-patterns involving five or fewer files to assess the impact of trivial anti-patterns. Results: The results reveal that 99.55% of these projects contain anti-patterns. Modularity Violation – frequent co-changes among seemingly unrelated files – is most prevalent (detected in 83.54% of all projects) and costly (incurred 61.55% of maintenance effort on average). Unstable Interface and Crossing, caused by influential but unstable files, although not as prevalent, tend to incur severe maintenance costs. Duck typing in Python incurs more anti-patterns, and the churn spent on Python files multiplies that of C/C++ and Java files. Several prevalent anti-patterns have a large portion of trivial instances, meaning that these common symptoms are usually not harmful. Conclusion: Implicit and visible dependencies are the most expensive to maintain, and dynamic typing in Python exacerbates the issue. Influential but unstable files need to be monitored and rectified early to prevent the accumulation of high maintenance costs. The violations of design principles are widespread, but many are not high-maintenance.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2232720
NSF-PAR ID:
10510450
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
ELSEVIER
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Information and Software Technology
Volume:
170
Issue:
C
ISSN:
0950-5849
Page Range / eLocation ID:
107429
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. null (Ed.)
    Dependencies among software entities are the basis for many software analytic research and architecture analysis tools. Dynamically typed languages, such as Python, JavaScript and Ruby, tolerate the lack of explicit type references, making certain syntactic dependencies indiscernible in source code. We call these possible dependencies, in contrast with the explicit dependencies that are directly referenced in source code. Type inference techniques have been widely studied and applied, but existing architecture analytic research and tools have not taken possible dependencies into consideration. The fundamental question is, to what extent will these missing possible dependencies impact the architecture analysis? To answer this question , we conducted an empirical study with 105 Python projects, using type inference techniques to manifest possible dependencies. Our study revealed that the architectural impact of possible dependencies is substantial-higher than that of explicit dependencies: (1) file-level possible dependencies account for at least 27.93% of all file-level dependencies, and create different dependency structures than that of explicit dependencies only, with an average difference of 30.71%; (2) adding possible dependencies significantly improves the precision (0.52%∼14.18%), recall(31.73%∼39.12%), and F1 scores (22.13%∼32.09%) of capturing co-change relations; (3) on average, a file involved in possible dependencies influences 28% more files and 42% more dependencies within architectural sub-spaces than a file involved in just explicit dependencies; (4) on average, a file involved in possible dependencies consumes 32% more maintenance effort. Consequently, maintainability scores reported by existing tools make a system written in these dynamic languages appear to be better modularized than it actually is. This evidence strongly * with the Ministry suggests that possible dependencies have a more significant impact than explicit dependencies on architecture quality, that architecture analysis and tools should assess and even emphasize the architectural impact of possible dependencies due to dynamic typing. 
    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)
    As a popular language for teaching introductory programming, Java can profoundly influence beginner programmers with its coding style and idioms. Despite its many advantages, the paradigmatic coding style in Java is often described as verbose. As a result, when writing code in more concise languages, such programmers tend to emulate the familiar Java coding idioms, thus neglecting to take advantage of the more succinct counterparts in those languages. As a result of such verbosity, not only the overall code quality suffers, but the verbose non-idiomatic patterns also render code hard to understand and maintain. In this paper, we study the incidences of Java-like verbosity as they occur in Python codebases. We present a collection of Java-Like Verbosity Anti-patterns and our pilot study of their presence in representative open-source Python codebases. We discuss our findings as a call for action to computing educators, particularly those who work with introductory students. We need novel pedagogical interventions that encourage budding programmers to write concise idiomatic code in any language. 
    more » « less
  3. Gradual typing has emerged as a popular design point in programming languages, attracting significant interests from both academia and industry. Programmers in gradually typed languages are free to utilize static and dynamic typing as needed. To make such languages sound, runtime checks mediate the boundary of typed and untyped code. Unfortunately, such checks can incur significant runtime overhead on programs that heavily mix static and dynamic typing. To combat this overhead without necessitating changes to the underlying implementations of languages, we present discriminative typing. Discriminative typing works by optimistically inferring types for functions and implementing an optimized version of the function based on this type. To preserve safety it also implements an un-optimized version of the function based purely on the provided annotations. With two versions of each function in hand, discriminative typing translates programs so that the optimized functions are called as frequently as possible while also preserving program behaviors.

    We have implemented discriminative typing in Reticulated Python and have evaluated its performance compared to guarded Reticulated Python. Our results show that discriminative typing improves the performance across 95% of tested programs, when compared to Reticulated, and achieves more than 4× speedup in more than 56% of these programs. We also compare its performance against a previous optimization approach and find that discriminative typing improved performance across 93% of tested programs, with 30% of these programs receiving speedups between 4 to 25 times. Finally, our evaluation shows that discriminative typing remarkably reduces the overhead of gradual typing on many mixed type configurations of programs.

    In addition, we have implemented discriminative typing in Grift and evaluated its performance. Our evaluation demonstrations that DT significantly improves performance of Grift

     
    more » « less
  4. null (Ed.)
    Polyglot programming, the use of multiple programming languages during the development process, is common practice in modern software development. This study investigates this practice through a randomized controlled trial conducted under the context of database programming. Participants in the study were given coding tasks written in Java and one of three SQL-like embedded languages. One was plain SQL in strings, one was in Java only, and the third was a hybrid embedded language that was closer to the host language. We recorded 109 valid data points. Results showed significant differences in how developers of different experience levels code using polyglot techniques. Notably, less experienced programmers wrote correct programs faster in the hybrid condition (frequent, but less severe, switches), while more experienced developers that already knew both languages performed better in traditional SQL (less frequent, but more complete, switches). The results indicate that the productivity impact of polyglot programming is complex and experience level dependent. 
    more » « less
  5. Call graphs have many applications in software engineering, including bug-finding, security analysis, and code navigation in IDEs. However, the construction of call graphs requires significant investment in program analysis infrastructure. An increasing number of programming languages compile to the Java Virtual Machine (JVM), and program analysis frameworks such as WALA and SOOT support a broad range of program analysis algorithms by analyzing JVM bytecode. This approach has been shown to work well when applied to bytecode produced from Java code. In this paper, we show that it also works well for diverse other JVM-hosted languages: dynamically-typed functional Scheme, statically-typed object-oriented Scala, and polymorphic functional OCaml. Effectively, we get call graph construction for these languages for free, using existing analysis infrastructure for Java, with only minor challenges to soundness. This, in turn, suggests that bytecode-based analysis could serve as an implementation vehicle for bug-finding, security analysis, and IDE features for these languages. We present qualitative and quantitative analyses of the soundness and precision of call graphs constructed from JVM bytecodes for these languages, and also for Groovy, Clojure, Python, and Ruby. However, we also show that implementation details matter greatly. In particular, the JVM-hosted implementations of Groovy, Clojure, Python, and Ruby produce very unsound call graphs, due to the pervasive use of reflection, invokedynamic instructions, and run-time code generation. Interestingly, the dynamic translation schemes employed by these languages, which result in unsound static call graphs, tend to be correlated with poor performance at run time. 
    more » « less