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

In pull-based development systems, code reviews and pull request commentsplay important roles in improving code quality. In such systems, reviewersattempt to carefully check a piece of code by different unit tests.Unfortunately, sometimes they miss bugs in their review of pull requests, whichlead to quality degradations of the systems. In other words, disastrousconsequences occur when bugs are observed after merging the pull requests. Thelack of a concrete understanding of these bugs led us to investigate andcategorize them. In this research, we try to identify missed bugs in pullrequests of SmartSHARK dataset projects. Our contribution is twofold. First, wehypothesized merged pull requests that have code reviews, code review comments,or pull request comments after merging, may have missed bugs after the codereview. We considered these merged pull requests as candidate pull requestshaving missed bugs. Based on our assumption, we obtained 3,261 candidate pullrequests from 77 open-source GitHub projects. After two rounds of restrictivemanual analysis, we found 187 bugs missed in 173 pull requests. In the firststep, we found 224 buggy pull requests containing missed bugs after merging thepull requests. Secondly, we defined and finalized a taxonomy that isappropriate for the bugs that we found and then found the distribution of bugcategories after analysing those pull requests all over again. The categoriesof missed bugs in pull requests and their distributions are: semantic (51.34%),build (15.5%), analysis checks (9.09%), compatibility (7.49%), concurrency(4.28%), configuration (4.28%), GUI (2.14%), API (2.14%), security (2.14%), andmemory (1.6%).

Which bugs are missed in code reviews: An empirical study on SmartSHARK dataset