Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Insight into Code Smell Detection Tool

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reliability Engineering for Industrial Processes

Part of the book series: Springer Series in Reliability Engineering ((RELIABILITY))

  • 56 Accesses

Abstract

A code smell isn’t a bug and it won’t help your system operate exceptionally. It might simply make it more difficult for software engineers to comprehend and maintain project source code, resulting in extra maintenance expenses. Researchers have provided a variety of techniques and tools for extracting code smells throughout the last 20 years. Therefore, there is a need for comprehensive research that summarizes and compares the large range of existing tools. We present a complete catalogue of all known code smell detection tools in this paper. We found 112 tools as a result of our study, 52 of them available for download online. They also support a variety of programming languages including Java, JavaScript, C, C++, C#, Python, and others. We categorize different code smell detection tools in this study based on their type, availability, detection techniques, identified code smells, supported languages, and main features.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
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

References

  1. Sharma T, Spinellis D (2018) A survey on software smells. J Syst Softw 138:158–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Van Emden E, Moonen L (2002) Java quality assurance by detecting code smells. In: Ninth working conference on reverse engineering, Proceedings, pp 97–106. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  3. Liu H, Ma Z, Shao W, Niu Z (2011) Schedule of bad smell detection and resolution: a new way to save effort. IEEE Trans Software Eng 38(1):220–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fontana FA, Mariani E, Mornioli A, Sormani R, Tonello A (2011) An experience report on using code smells detection tools. In: 2011 IEEE fourth international conference on software testing, verification and validation workshops, pp 450–457. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gerlitz T, Tran QM, Dziobek C (2015) Detection and handling of model smells for MATLAB/Simulink models. In: MASE@ MoDELS, pp 13–22

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kessentini M, Ouni A (2017) Detecting android smells using multi-objective genetic programming. In: 2017 IEEE/ACM 4th international conference on mobile software engineering and systems (MOBILESoft), pp 122–132. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  7. Palomba F, Di Nucci D, Panichella A, Zaidman A, De Lucia A (2017) Lightweight detection of android-specific code smells: The adoctor project. In: 2017 IEEE 24th international conference on software analysis, evolution and reengineering (SANER), pp 487–491. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  8. Singh S, Kaur S (2018) A systematic literature review: refactoring for disclosing code smells in object oriented software. Ain Shams Eng J 9(4):2129–2151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fernandes E, Oliveira J, Vale G, Paiva T, Figueiredo E (2016) A review-based comparative study of bad smell detection tools. In: Proceedings of the 20th International conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering, pp 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gupta A, Suri B, Kumar V, Misra S, Blažauskas T, Damaševičius R (2018) Software code smell prediction model using Shannon. Rényi and Tsallis entropies. Entropy 20(5):372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tandon S, Kumar V, Singh VB (2022) An empirical analysis of code smells using CRITIC-TOPSIS method. In: 2022 12th international conference on cloud computing, data science & engineering (Confluence), pp 234–239. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tandon S, Kumar V, Singh VB (2022) Empirical evaluation of code smells in open-source software (OSS) using Best Worst Method (BWM) and TOPSIS approach. Int J Qual Reliab Manag 39(3):815–835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gupta A, Gandhi R, Kumar V (2023) Investigating bad smells with feature selection and machine learning approaches. In: Kumar V, Pham H (eds) Predictive analytics in system reliability. Springer series in reliability engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05347-4_4

  14. Yamashita A, Moonen L (2013) To what extent can maintenance problems be predicted by code smell detection?–An empirical study. Inf Softw Technol 55(12):2223–2242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Trifu A, Marinescu R (2005) Diagnosing design problems in object oriented systems. In: 12th working conference on reverse engineering (WCRE’05), pp 10-pp. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schumacher J, Zazworka N, Shull F, Seaman C, Shaw M (2010) Building empirical support for automated code smell detection. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, pp 1–10

    Google Scholar 

  17. Olbrich S, Cruzes DS, Basili V, Zazworka N (2009) The evolution and impact of code smells: a case study of two open source systems. In: 2009 3rd international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, pp 390–400. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fontana FA, Ferme V, Marino A, Walter B, Martenka P (2013) Investigating the impact of code smells on system’s quality: an empirical study on systems of different application domains. In: 2013 IEEE international conference on software maintenance, pp 260–269. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  19. Evans WS, Fraser CW, Ma F (2009) Clone detection via structural abstraction. Software Qual J 17(4):309–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yamashita A (2014) Assessing the capability of code smells to explain maintenance problems: an empirical study combining quantitative and qualitative data. Empir Softw Eng 19(4):1111–1143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fontana FA, Mangiacavalli M, Pochiero D, Zanoni M (2015) On experimenting refactoring tools to remove code smells. In: Scientific workshop proceedings of the XP2015, pp 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kamiya T, Kusumoto S, Inoue K (2002) CCFinder: a multilinguistic token-based code clone detection system for large scale source code. IEEE Trans Software Eng 28(7):654–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ochodek M, Hebig R, Meding W, Frost G, Staron M (2020) Recognizing lines of code violating company-specific coding guidelines using machine learning. Empir Softw Eng 25(1):220–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kaurr H, Maini R (2020) Function clone removal using refactoring techniques. Adv Math Scientific J 9(6):4001–4013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tourwé T, Mens T (2003) Identifying refactoring opportunities using logic meta programming. In: Seventh European conference onsoftware maintenance and reengineering, 2003. Proceedings, pp 91–100. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  26. Basit HA, Jarzabek S (2009) A data mining approach for detecting higher-level clones in software. IEEE Trans Software Eng 35(4):497–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wahler V, Seipel D, Wolff J, Fischer G (2004) Clone detection in source code by frequent itemset techniques. In: Source code analysis and manipulation, fourth IEEE international workshop on, pp 128–135. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  28. Marinescu R (2004) Detection strategies: Metrics-based rules for detecting design flaws. In: 20th IEEE international conference on software maintenance, 2004. Proceedings, pp 350–359. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  29. Marinescu R, Ratiu D (2004) Quantifying the quality of object-oriented design: the factor-strategy model. In: 11th Working conference on reverse engineering, pp 192–201. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  30. Deissenboeck F, Pizka M, Seifert T (2005) Tool support for continuous quality assessment. In: 13th IEEE International workshop on software technology and engineering practice (STEP’05), pp 127–136. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  31. Ratzinger J, Fischer M, Gall H (2005) Evolens: Lens-view visualizations of evolution data. In: Eighth international workshop on principles of software evolution (IWPSE’05), pp 103–112. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kreimer J (2005) Adaptive detection of design flaws. Electron Notes Theoret Comput Sci 141(4):117–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Eichberg M, Haupt M, Mezini M, Schafer T (2005) Comprehensive software understanding with SEXTANT. In 21st IEEE international conference on software maintenance (ICSM’05), pp 315–324. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  34. Basit HA, Jarzabek S (2005) Detecting higher-level similarity patterns in programs. ACM Sigsoft Softw Eng Notes 30(5):156–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Slinger S (2005) Code smell detection in eclipse. Delft University of Technology

    Google Scholar 

  36. Fontana FA, Zanoni M, Marino A, Mäntylä MV (2013) Code smell detection: Towards a machine learning-based approach. In: 2013 IEEE international conference on software maintenance, pp 396–399. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  37. Romano S, Scanniello G, Sartiani C, Risi M (2016) A graph-based approach to detect unreachable methods in java software. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM symposium on applied computing, pp 1538–1541

    Google Scholar 

  38. Roy CK, Cordy JR, Koschke R (2009) Comparison and evaluation of code clone detection techniques and tools: a qualitative approach. Sci Comput Program 74(7):470–495

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Parnin C, Görg C, Nnadi O (2008) A catalogue of lightweight visualizations to support code smell inspection. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM symposium on software visualization, pp 77–86

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sager T, Bernstein A, Pinzger M, Kiefer C (2006) Detecting similar Java classes using tree algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Mining software repositories, pp 65–71

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kirk D, Roper M, Wood M (2007) A heuristic-based approach to code-smell detection

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lavazza L, Morasca S, Tosi D (2021) Comparing static analysis and code smells as defect predictors: an empirical study. In: IFIP international conference on open source systems, pp 1–15. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  43. Fokaefs M, Tsantalis N, Chatzigeorgiou A (2007) Jdeodorant: Identification and removal of feature envy bad smells. In: 2007 IEEE international conference on software maintenance, pp 519–520. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  44. Jiang L, Misherghi G, Su Z, Glondu S (2007) Deckard: Scalable and accurate tree-based detection of code clones. In: 29th International conference on software engineering (ICSE’07), pp 96–105. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kiefer C, Bernstein A, Tappolet J (2007) Mining software repositories with isparol and a software ontology. In: Fourth international workshop on mining software repositories (MSR’07: ICSE Workshops 2007), pp 10–10. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  46. Duala-Ekoko E, Robillard MP (2007) Tracking code clones in evolving software. In: 29th International conference on software engineering (ICSE’07), pp 158–167. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  47. Bulychev P, Minea M (2008) Duplicate code detection using anti-unification. In: Proceedings of the spring/summer young researchers’ colloquium on software engineering (No. 2)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Singh V, Snipes W, Kraft NA (2014) A framework for estimating interest on technical debt by monitoring developer activity related to code comprehension. In: 2014 Sixth international workshop on managing technical debt, pp 27–30. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  49. Lujan S, Pecorelli F, Palomba F, De Lucia A, Lenarduzzi V (2020) A preliminary study on the adequacy of static analysis warnings with respect to code smell prediction. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGSOFT international workshop on machine-learning techniques for software-quality evaluation, pp 1–6

    Google Scholar 

  50. Fu S, Shen B (2015) Code bad smell detection through evolutionary data mining. In: 2015 ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement (ESEM), pp 1–9. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  51. Roperia N (2009) JSmell: a bad smell detection tool for java systems. California State University, Long Beach

    Google Scholar 

  52. Juergens E, Deissenboeck F, Hummel B, Wagner S (2009) Do code clones matter?. In: 2009 IEEE 31st international conference on software engineering, pp 485–495. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  53. Yang L, Liu H, Niu Z (2009) Identifying fragments to be extracted from long methods. In: 2009 16th Asia-pacific software engineering conference, pp 43–49. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  54. Juergens E, Deissenboeck F, Hummel B (2009) Clonedetective-a workbench for clone detection research. In: 2009 IEEE 31st international conference on software engineering, p. 603–606. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  55. Boccuzzo S, Gall HC (2009) Automated comprehension tasks in software exploration. In: 2009 IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, pp 570–574. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  56. Higo Y, Kusumoto S (2009) Enhancing quality of code clone detection with program dependency graph. In 2009 16th Working conference on reverse engineering, pp 315–316. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  57. Telea A, Byelas H, Voinea L (2009) A framework for reverse engineering large C++ code bases. Electron Notes Theoret Comput Sci 233:143–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Nödler J, Neukirchen H, Grabowski J (2009) A flexible framework for quality assurance of software artefacts with applications to java, uml, and ttcn-3 test specifications. In: 2009 International conference on software testing verification and validation, pp 101–110. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  59. Ganea G, Verebi I, Marinescu R (2017) Continuous quality assessment with inCode. Sci Comput Program 134:19–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Moha N, Guéhéneuc YG, Duchien L, Le Meur AF (2009) Decor: a method for the specification and detection of code and design smells. IEEE Trans Software Eng 36(1):20–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Murphy-Hill E, Black AP (2010) An interactive ambient visualization for code smells. In: Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on Software visualization, pp 5–14

    Google Scholar 

  62. Carneiro GDF, Silva M, Mara L, Figueiredo E, Sant’Anna C, Garcia A, Mendonça M (2010) Identifying code smells with multiple concern views. In: 2010 Brazilian symposium on software engineering, pp 128–137. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  63. Li H, Thompson S (2010) Similar code detection and elimination for Erlang programs. In: International symposium on practical aspects of declarative languages, pp 104–118. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  64. Fontana FA, Ferme V, Spinelli S (2012) Investigating the impact of code smells debt on quality code evaluation. In: 2012 third international workshop on managing technical debt (MTD), pp 15–22. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  65. Ferenc R (2010) Bug forecast: a method for automatic bug prediction. In: International conference on advanced software engineering and its applications, pp 283–295. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  66. Peldzius S (2010) Automatic detection of possible refactorings. I:n Proceedings of the 16th international conference on information and software technologies (ICIST), pp 238–245

    Google Scholar 

  67. Von Detten M, Meyer M, Travkin D (2010) Reverse engineering with the reclipse tool suite. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE international conference on software engineering-Volume 2, pp 299–300

    Google Scholar 

  68. Guo Y, Seaman C, Zazworka N, Shull F (2010) Domain-specific tailoring of code smells: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE international conference on software engineering, Vol 2, pp 167–170

    Google Scholar 

  69. Mathur N (2011) Java smell detector

    Google Scholar 

  70. Sjøberg DI, Yamashita A, Anda BC, Mockus A, Dybå T (2012) Quantifying the effect of code smells on maintenance effort. IEEE Trans Software Eng 39(8):1144–1156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Cordy JR, Roy CK (2011) The NiCad clone detector. In: 2011 IEEE 19th international conference on program comprehension, pp 219–220. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  72. Feng C, Wang T, Liu J, Zhang Y, Xu K, Wang Y (2020) NiCad+: speeding the detecting process of nicad. In: 2020 IEEE international conference on service oriented systems engineering (SOSE), pp 103–110. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  73. Griffith I, Wahl S, Izurieta C (2011) TrueRefactor: an automated refactoring tool to improve legacy system and application comprehensibility. In: 24th international conference on computer applications in industry and engineering, ISCA 2011

    Google Scholar 

  74. Stevens R, De Roover C, Noguera C, Kellens A, Jonckers V (2014) A logic foundation for a general-purpose history querying tool. Sci Comput Program 96:107–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Kellens A, De Roover C, Noguera C, Stevens R, Jonckers V (2011) Reasoning over the evolution of source code using quantified regular path expressions. In: 2011 18th working conference on reverse engineering, pp 389–393. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  76. Arcelli Fontana F, Mäntylä MV, Zanoni M, Marino A (2016) Comparing and experimenting machine learning techniques for code smell detection. Empir Softw Eng 21(3):1143–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Simon F, Steinbruckner F, Lewerentz C (2001) Metrics based refactoring. In: Proceedings fifth European conference on software maintenance and reengineering, pp 30–38. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  78. Khomh F, Vaucher S, Guéhéneuc YG, Sahraoui H (2011) BDTEX: A GQM-based Bayesian approach for the detection of antipatterns. J Syst Softw 84(4):559–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Mara L, Honorato G, Medeiros FD, Garcia A, Lucena C (2011) Hist-inspect: a tool for history-sensitive detection of code smells. In Proceedings of the tenth international conference on Aspect-oriented software development companion, pp 65–66

    Google Scholar 

  80. Zibran MF, Roy CK (2011) Towards flexible code clone detection, management, and refactoring in IDE. In: Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on software clones, pp 75–76

    Google Scholar 

  81. Gopalan R (2012) Automatic detection of code smells in Java source code (Doctoral dissertation, Dissertation for Honour Degree, The University of Western Australia)

    Google Scholar 

  82. Alves P, Santana D, Figueiredo E (2012) ConcernReCS: finding code smells in software aspectization. In: 2012 34th international conference on software engineering (ICSE), pp 1463–1464. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  83. Wust J (2005) SDMetrics: the software design metrics tool for UML

    Google Scholar 

  84. Tamrawi A, Nguyen HA, Nguyen HV, Nguyen TN (2012) SYMake: a build code analysis and refactoring tool for makefiles. In: 2012 Proceedings of the 27th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, pp 366–369. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  85. Islam MR, Zibran MF, Nagpal A (2017) Security vulnerabilities in categories of clones and non-cloned code: an empirical study. In: 2017 ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement (ESEM), pp 20–29. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  86. Macia I, Arcoverde R, Cirilo E, Garcia A, von Staa A (2012) Supporting the identification of architecturally-relevant code anomalies. ICSM12, 662–665

    Google Scholar 

  87. Danphitsanuphan P, Suwantada T (2012) Code smell detecting tool and code smell-structure bug relationship. In: 2012 Spring congress on engineering and technology, pp 1–5. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  88. Raab F (2012) CodeSmellExplorer: tangible exploration of code smells and refactorings. In: 2012 IEEE symposium on visual languages and human-centric computing (VL/HCC), pp 261–262. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  89. Pessoa T, Monteiro MP, Bryton S (2012) An eclipse plugin to support code smells detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:1204.6492

  90. Nongpong K (2012) Integrating” Code Smells” Detection with refactoring tool support (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee)

    Google Scholar 

  91. Rasool G, Arshad Z (2015) A review of code smell mining techniques. J Softw Evolut Process 27(11):867–895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Maiga A, Ali N, Bhattacharya N, Sabané A, Guéhéneuc YG, Antoniol G, Aïmeur E (2012) Support vector machines for anti-pattern detection. In: 2012 Proceedings of the 27th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, pp 278–281. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  93. Liu H, Guo X, Shao W (2013) Monitor-based instant software refactoring. IEEE Trans Software Eng 39(8):1112–1126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Fard AM, Mesbah A (2013) Jsnose: detecting javascript code smells. In: 2013 IEEE 13th international working conference on source code analysis and manipulation (SCAM), pp 116–125. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  95. Kaur A, Raperia H (2013) Implementation and analysis of a refactoring tool for detecting code smells. Int J Comput Technol 6(1):242–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Arnaoudova V, Di Penta M, Antoniol G, Guéhéneuc YG (2013) A new family of software anti-patterns: Linguistic anti-patterns. In: 2013 17th European conference on software maintenance and reengineering, pp 187–196. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  97. Vidal SA, Marcos C, Díaz-Pace JA (2016) An approach to prioritize code smells for refactoring. Autom Softw Eng 23(3):501–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Sahin D, Kessentini M, Bechikh S, Deb K (2014) Code-smell detection as a bilevel problem. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol (TOSEM) 24(1):1–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Hall T, Zhang M, Bowes D, Sun Y (2014) Some code smells have a significant but small effect on faults. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol (TOSEM) 23(4):1–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Medeiros F (2014) An approach to safely evolve program families in c. In: Proceedings of the companion publication of the 2014 ACM SIGPLAN conference on systems, programming, and applications: software for humanity, pp 25–27

    Google Scholar 

  101. Chaudron MR, Katumba B, Ran X (2014) Automated prioritization of metrics-based design flaws in UML class diagrams. In: 2014 40th EUROMICRO conference on software engineering and advanced applications, pp 369–376. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  102. Grigera J, Garrido A, Rivero JM (2014) A tool for detecting bad usability smells automatically. In: International conference on web engineering, pp 490–493. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  103. Arcelli F, Rolla M, Zanoni M (2014) VCS-analyzer for software evolution empirical analysis. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, pp 1–1

    Google Scholar 

  104. Sharma VS, Anwer S (2014) Performance antipatterns: detection and evaluation of their effects in the cloud. In: 2014 IEEE international conference on services computing, pp 758–765. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  105. Mahajan G, Bharti M (2014) Implementing a 3-way approach of clone detection and removal using pc detector tool. In: 2014 IEEE international advance computing conference (IACC), pp 1435–1441. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  106. Singh S, Kaur R (2014) Clone detection in UML class models using class metrics. ACM SIGSOFT Softw Eng Notes 39(3):1–3

    Google Scholar 

  107. Romano S, Scanniello G (2018) Exploring the use of rapid type analysis for detecting the dead method smell in java code. In: 2018 44th Euromicro conference on software engineering and advanced applications (SEAA), pp 167–174. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  108. Hecht G, Rouvoy R, Moha N, Duchien L (2015) Detecting antipatterns in android apps. In: 2015 2nd ACM international conference on mobile software engineering and systems, pp 148–149. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  109. Liu X, Zhang C (2017) DT: a detection tool to automatically detect code smell in software project. In: 2016 4th International conference on machinery, materials and information technology applications, pp 681–684. Atlantis Press

    Google Scholar 

  110. Velioğlu S, Selçuk YE (2017) An automated code smell and anti-pattern detection approach. In: 2017 IEEE 15th international conference on software engineering research, management and applications (SERA), pp 271–275. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  111. Fontana FA, Pigazzini I, Roveda R, Zanoni M (2016) Automatic detection of instability architectural smells. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on software maintenance and evolution (ICSME), pp 433–437. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  112. Peldszus S, Kulcsár G, Lochau M, Schulze S (2016) Continuous detection of design flaws in evolving object-oriented programs using incremental multi-pattern matching. In: 2016 31st IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering (ASE), pp 578–589. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  113. Sajnani H, Saini V, Svajlenko J, Roy CK, Lopes CV (2016) Sourcerercc: Scaling code clone detection to big-code. In: Proceedings of the 38th international conference on software engineering, pp 1157–1168

    Google Scholar 

  114. Chen B, Jiang ZM (2017) Characterizing and detecting anti-patterns in the logging code. In: 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th international conference on software engineering (ICSE), pp 71–81. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  115. Sousa BL, Souza PP, Fernandes EM, Ferreira KA, Bigonha MA (2017) FindSmells: flexible composition of bad smell detection strategies. In: 2017 IEEE/ACM 25th international conference on program comprehension (ICPC), pp 360–363. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  116. Prokić S, Grujić KG, Luburić N, Slivka J, Kovačević A, Vidaković D, Sladić G (2021) Clean code and design educational tool. In: 2021 44th international convention on information, communication and electronic technology (MIPRO), pp 1601–1606. IEEE

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer and System Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

    Shrasti Mourya, Piyush Pratap Singh & V. B. Singh

Authors
  1. Shrasti Mourya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Piyush Pratap Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. B. Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. B. Singh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Amity Center for Interdisciplinary Research, Amity University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

    P. K. Kapur

  2. Department of Industrial Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA

    Hoang Pham

  3. Amity International Business School, Amity University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

    Gurinder Singh

  4. Amity International Business School, Amity University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

    Vivek Kumar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mourya, S., Singh, P.P., Singh, V.B. (2024). An Insight into Code Smell Detection Tool. In: Kapur, P.K., Pham, H., Singh, G., Kumar, V. (eds) Reliability Engineering for Industrial Processes. Springer Series in Reliability Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55048-5_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55048-5_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-55047-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-55048-5

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation