Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering ((LNEE,volume 212))

  • 669 Accesses

Abstract

Context Software modules are the basic building blocks of any software project and these modules are engineered differently for different types of projects. Having a diversity of engineering practice, the attributes of these modules should have different impact on projects. Objective We studied 54 software projects to analyze the impact of modules attributes on the project’s quality in term of defect density (DD). Results We found that the module’s attributes i.e. very small modules on size and defect free modules have significant impact on the projects DD. The former more percentage resulted in higher projects DD and later more percentage resulted in lower projects DD. The attribute module dependencies have no significant impact on the projects DD. Moreover, we found that projects type (student, open source) having higher DD have more percentage of modules with higher DD, but this trend is not found in the close source projects. We found the significant relationship of projects DD with the module attributes (defect free and very small). Conclusion Different module attributes have different impact on projects DD and modules behave differently for different types of projects. This empirical work suggests practitioners and researcher with evidence how module attributes affects the projects DD. The authors recommend some suggestions to take into account during the software construction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://promisedata.org/

  2. 2.

    http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/oodmetrc.pdf

References

  1. Shen VY, Tze-jie Yu, Thebaut SM, Paulsen LR (1985) Identifying error-prone software—an empirical study. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-11(4):317–24. doi:10.1109/TSE.1985.232222

  2. Basili VR, Perricone BT (1984) Software errors and complexity: an empirical investigation. Commun ACM 27(1):42–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Withrow C (1990) Error density and size in Ada software. IEEE Software 7(1):26–30. doi:10.1109/52.43046

    Google Scholar 

  4. Banker RD, Kemerer CF (1989) Scale economies in new software development. IEEE Trans Software Eng 15(10):1199–205. doi:10.1109/TSE.1989.559768

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fenton NE, Ohlsson N (2000) Quantitative analysis of faults and failures in a complex software system. IEEE Trans Software Eng 26(8):797–814. doi:10.1109/32.879815

    Google Scholar 

  6. Andersson C, Runeson P (2007) A replicated quantitative analysis of fault distributions in complex software systems. IEEE Trans Software Eng 33(5):273–86. doi:10.1109/TSE.2007.1005

    Google Scholar 

  7. Moller K-H, Paulish DJ (1993) An empirical investigation of software fault distribution. In: Proceedings on first international software metrics symposium, pp 82–90

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hatton L (1997) Reexamining the fault density component size connection. IEEE Software 14(2):89–97. doi:10.1109/52.582978

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rosenberg J (1997) Some misconceptions about lines of code. In: Proceedings of Fourth international symposium on software metrics, pp 137–42

    Google Scholar 

  10. El Emam K, Benlarbi S, Goel N, Melo W, Lounis H, Rai SN (2002) The optimal class size for object-oriented software. IEEE Trans Software Eng 28(5):494–509. doi:10.1109/TSE.2002.1000452

    Google Scholar 

  11. Koru AG, Dongsong Zhang, El Emam K, Hongfang Liu (2009) An investigation into the functional form of the size-defect relationship for software modules. IEEE Trans Software Eng 35(2):293–304. doi:10.1109/TSE.2008.90

  12. Koru A, Emam KE, Zhang D, Liu H, Mathew D (2008) Theory of relative defect proneness. Empirical Softw Eng 13(5):473–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Boetticher G, Menzies T, Ostrand T (2007) PROMISE repository of empirical software engineering data [Internet]. Available from http://promisedata.org/ repository, West Virginia University, Department of Computer Science

  14. Wohlin C, Runeson P, Höst M, Ohlsson MC, Regnell B, Wesslen A (2000) Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Syed Muhammad Ali Shah .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Shah, S.M.A., Morisio, M. (2013). The Impact of Module Attributes on Project Defect Density. In: Lu, W., Cai, G., Liu, W., Xing, W. (eds) Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Information Technology and Software Engineering. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 212. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34531-9_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34531-9_26

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-34530-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-34531-9

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics