English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Many research areas in software engineering, such as mutation testing,automatic repair, fault localization, and fault injection, rely on empiricalknowledge about recurring bug-fixing code changes. Previous studies in thisfield focus on what has been changed due to bug-fixes, such as in terms of codeedit actions. However, such studies did not consider where the bug-fix changewas made (i.e., the context of the change), but knowing about the context canpotentially narrow the search space for many software engineering techniques(e.g., by focusing mutation only on specific parts of the software).Furthermore, most previous work on bug-fixing changes focused on C and Javaprojects, but there is little empirical evidence about Python software.Therefore, in this paper we perform a thorough empirical analysis of bug-fixingchanges in three OpenStack projects, focusing on both the what and the where ofthe changes. We observed that all the recurring change patterns are notoblivious with respect to the surrounding code, but tend to occur in specificcode contexts.

Analyzing the Context of Bug-Fixing Changes in the OpenStack Cloud Computing Platform