Micro pattern evolution

When analyzing the evolution history of a software project, we wish to develop results that generalize across projects. One approach is to analyze design patterns, permitting characteristics of the evolution to be associated with patterns, instead of source code. Traditional design patterns are generally not amenable to reliable automatic extraction from source code, yet automation is crucial for scalable evolution analysis. Instead, we analyze “micro pattern” evolution; patterns whose abstraction level is closer to source code, and designed to be automatically extractable from Java source code or bytecode. We perform micro-pattern evolution analysis on three open source projects, ArgoUML, Columba, and jEdit to identify micro pattern frequencies, common kinds of pattern evolution, and bug-prone patterns. In all analyzed projects, we found that the micro patterns of Java classes do not change often. Common bug- prone pattern evolution kinds are ‘Pool → Pool’, ‘Implementor → NONE’, and ‘Sampler → Sampler’. Among all pattern evolution kinds,‘Box’,‘CompoundBox’, ‘Pool’, ‘CommonState’, and ‘Outline’ micro patterns have high bug rates, but they have low frequencies and a small number of changes. The pattern evolution kinds that are bug-prone are somewhat similar across projects. The bug-prone pattern evolution kinds of two different periods of the same project are almost identical.