Abstract:Automatic static analysis tools (ASATs) detect source code violations to static analysis rules and are usually used as a guard for source code quality. The adoption of ASATs, however, is often challenged because of several problems such as a large number of false alarms, invalid rule priorities, and inappropriate rule configurations. Research has shown that tracking the history of the violations is a promising way to solve the above problems because the facts of violation fixing may reflect the developers' subjective expectations on the violation detection results. Precisely identifying the revisions that induce or fix a violation is however challenging because of the imprecise matching of violations between code revisions and ignorance of merge commits in the maintenance history. In this paper, we propose ViolationTracker, an approach to precisely matching the violation instances between adjacent revisions and building the life cycle of violations with the identification of inducing, fixing, deleting, and reopening of each violation case. The approach employs code entity anchoring heuristics for violation matching and considers merge commits that used to be ignored in existing research. We evaluate ViolationTracker with a manually-validated dataset that consists of 500 violation instances and 158 threads of 30 violation cases with detailed evolution history from open-source projects. Violation Tracker achieves over 93 % precision and 98 % recall on violation matching, outperforming the state-of-the-art approach, and 99.4 % precision on rebuilding the histories of violation cases. We also show that ViolationTracker is useful to identify actionable violations. A preliminary empirical study reveals the possibility to prioritize static analysis rules according to further analysis on the actionable rates of the rules.

Automatically Extracting Implicit Programming Rules and Detecting Violations from C Programs

Rough Rule Extracting from Various Conditions: Incremental and Approximate Approaches for Inconsistent Data.

Mining Exception-Handling Rules As Sequence Association Rules

NEGWeb : Detecting Neglected Conditions via Mining Programming Rules from Open Source Code

Alattin: Mining Alternative Patterns for Defect Detection

Detecting Bugs by Discovering Expectations and Their Violations

API-misuse detection driven by fine-grained API-constraint knowledge graph

Research on Rules to Remove Variation in Source Codes

Mining Temporal Rules for Software Maintenance

Automatic abstraction for C program

Automatic Web Information Extraction Based On Rules

Efficient Mining of Iterative Patterns for Software Specification Discovery

Mining Python fix patterns via analyzing fine-grained source code changes

Rule generation with the pattern repository

Between Lines of Code: Unraveling the Distinct Patterns of Machine and Human Programmers

Automated Program-Semantic Defect Repair and False-Positive Elimination without Side Effects

Mining Past-Time Temporal Rules

Efficient Design Rule Checking Script Generation Via Key Information Extraction

Detecting Resource Leaks Through Dynamical Mining of Resource Usage Patterns

Integrating Rough Set And Genetic Algorithm For Negative Rule Extraction

ViolationTracker: Building Precise Histories for Static Analysis Violations