An Experimental Study of the Logical Complexity of Data Structures
The logical complexity of a program is a measure of the effort required in order to understand it. Current program complexity metrics do not model the complexity induced by the choice of different data structures. It is proposed that the complexity of a program increases with the increase in the opaqueness of the relationship between abstract data types and the data structures used to implement them. The details of an experiment conducted to investigate this hypothesis are reported. Some documentation techniques which can reduce the difficulty in understanding programs using complex data structures are illustrated for the programs used in the experiment.
KeywordsData Structure Binary Tree Logical Complexity Abstract Data Type Complete Binary Tree
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.M. H Halsted,Elements of Software Science, Elsevier, North-Holland, New York, 1977Google Scholar
- 5.S. S. Iyengar N, Parameswaran, and J. Fuller , A measure of logical complexity of programs,Comput. Lang Dec 19827 (4)Google Scholar
- 8.F. B. Bastani and S. S. Iyengar,The Effect of Data Structure on the Logical Complexity of Programs, Tech. Rept. UH-CS-84-7, Dept. of camp. Sri., Univ. of Houston - Univ, Park, fl9U5t9n, TXI 1984.Google Scholar
- 9.B. D. Chaudhary,Factors of Program Complexity and Their Effects on Program Comprehension, Ph.D. Dissertation, Indian Inst. of Tech., Kanpur, 1979.Google Scholar
- 12.L. Weissman,A Methodology for Studying the Psychological Complexity of Computer Programs, Tech. Rep. CSRG-37, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Univ. of Toronto, 1974.Google Scholar
- 13.E. W. Dijkstra,A Discipline of Programming, Prentice-Hall Inc., NJ, 1976.Google Scholar
- 16.B. H. Liskov and S. N. Zilles, Specification techniques for data abstraction,IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng March 1975, SE-1 (1), pp. 7–19.Google Scholar
- 17.W. A. Wulf, R. L. London, and M. Shaw, An introduction to the construction and verification of ALPHARD programs,IEEE Trans. Sof tw. Eng Dec. 1976,SE-2 (4), pp. 353–365.Google Scholar