skip to main content
10.1145/774833.774844acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessoftvisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

A system for graph-based visualization of the evolution of software

Published:11 June 2003Publication History

ABSTRACT

We describe GEVOL, a system that visualizes the evolution of software using a novel graph drawing technique for visualization of large graphs with a temporal component. GEVOL extracts information about a Java program stored within a CVS version control system and displays it using a temporal graph visualizer. This information can be used by programmers to understand the evolution of a legacy program: Why is the program structured the way it is? Which programmers were responsible for which parts of the program during which time periods? Which parts of the program appear unstable over long periods of time and may need to be rewritten? This type of information will complement that produced by more static tools such as source code browsers, slicers, and static analyzers.

References

  1. BALL, T., AND EICK, S. G. 1996. Software visualization in the large. IEEE Computer 29, 4, 33--43.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. BALL, T., KIM, J., PORTER, A., AND SIY, H. 1997. If your version control system could talk. In ICSE '97 Workshop on Process Modelling and Empirical Studies of Software Engineering.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. BRANDES, U., AND WAGNER, D. 1998. A bayesian paradigm for dynamic graph layout. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Graph Drawing (GD), Springer-Verlag, G. Di Battista, Ed., vol. 1353 of Lecture Notes Computer Science, 236--247.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. BROWN, M. 1988. Exploring algorithms using Balsa-II. IEEE Computer 21, 5, 14--36.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. BROWN, M. H. 1992. Zeus: A system for algorithm animation and multi-view editing. Tech. Rep. 75, 28.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. CHIDAMBER, S. R., AND KEMERER, C. F. 1994. A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 20, 6 (June), 476--493.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. COHEN, R. F., BATTISTA, G. D., TAMASSIA, R., TOLLIS, I. G., AND BERTOLAZZI, P. 1992. A framework for dynamic graph drawing. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry (SCG '92), ACM Press, Berlin, FRG, A.-S. ACM-SIGGRAPH, Ed., 261--270.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. COHEN, R. F., DI BATTISTA, G., TAMASSIA, R., AND TOLLIS, I. G. 1995. Dynamic graph drawings: Trees, series-parallel digraphs, and planar ST-digraphs. SIAM J. Comput. 24, 5, 970--1001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. COLLBERG, C., 2003. Sandmark: A tool for the study of software protection algorithms. http://www.cs.arizona.edu/sandmark.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. DIEHL, S., AND GÖRG, C. 2002. Graphs, they are changing. In Proceedings of the 10th Symposium on Graph Drawing (GD), 23--30.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. EADES, P. 1984. A heuristic for graph drawing. Congressus Numerantium 42, 149--160.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. EICK, S. G., GRAVES, T. L., KARR, A. F., MOCKUS, A., AND SCHUSTER, P. 2002. Visualizing software changes. Software Engineering 28, 4, 396--412.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. FRUCHTERMAN, T., AND REINGOLD, E. 1991. Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Softw. -- Pract. Exp. 21, 11, 1129--1164.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. GAJER, P., AND KOBOUROV, S. G. 2000. GRIP: Graph dRawing with Intelligent Placement. In Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Graph Drawing (GD), 222--228.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. GAJER, P., GOODRICH, M. T., AND KOBOUROV, S. G. 2000. A multidimensional approach to force-directed layouts. In Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Graph Drawing (GD), 211--221.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. HALSTEAD, M. H. 1977. Elements of Software Science. Elsevier North-Holland.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. HENRY, S., AND KAFURA, D. 1981. Software structure metrics based on information flow. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 7, 5 (Sept.), 510--518.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. KAMADA, T., AND KAWAI, S. 1988. Automatic display of network structures for human understanding. Tech. Rep. 88-007, Department of Information Science, University of Tokyo.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. KAMADA, T., AND KAWAI, S. 1989. An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Inform. Process. Lett. 31, 7--15.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. MCCABE, T. J. 1976. A complexity measure. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 2, 4 (Dec.), 308--320.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. MOCKUS, A., EICK, S., GRAVES, T., AND KARR, A., 1999. On measurement and analysis of software changes.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. MOEN, S. 1990. Drawing dynamic trees. IEEE Software 7, 4 (July), 21--28.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. MYERS., B. A. 1986. Visual programming, programming by example, and program visualization: A taxonomy. In ACM SIGCHI '86 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 59--66.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. MYERS, B. A. 1990. Taxonomies of visual programming and program visualization. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 1, 1 (Mar.), 97--123.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. NORTH, S. C. 1996. Incremental layout in DynaDAG. In Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Graph Drawing (GD), 409--418.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. OVIEDO, E. I. 1980. Control flow, data flow, and program complexity. In Proceedings of IEEE COMPSAC, 146--152.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. PRICE, B. A., SMALL, I. S., AND BAECKER, R. M. 1992. A taxonomy of software visualization. In Proc. 25th Hawaii Int. Conf. System Sciences.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. ROMAN, G.-C., AND COX, K. C. 1993. A taxonomy of program visualization systems. IEEE Computer 26, 12, 11--24.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. STOREY, M.-A. D., WONG, K., FRACCHIA, F. D., AND MULLER, H. A. 1997. On integrating visualization techniques for effective software exploration. 38--45.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. TAYLOR, C., AND MUNRO, M. 2002. Revision towers. In Visualizing Software for Understanding and Analysis, IEEE Computer Press, 43--50.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. YOUNG, P., AND MUNRO, M., 1997. A new view of call graphs for visualising code structures.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SoftVis '03: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Software visualization
    June 2003
    211 pages
    ISBN:1581136420
    DOI:10.1145/774833

    Copyright © 2003 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 11 June 2003

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • Article

    Acceptance Rates

    SoftVis '03 Paper Acceptance Rate20of65submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate20of65submissions,31%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader