Abstract
A branch of automated program repair (APR) techniques look at finding and reusing existing code for bug repair. ssFix is one of such techniques that is syntactic search-based: it searches a code database for code fragments that are syntactically similar to the bug context and reuses such code fragments to produce patches. The keys to its success lie in the approaches it uses for code search and code reuse. We investigated the effectiveness of ssFix using the Defects4J bug dataset and found that its code search and code reuse approaches are not truly effective and can be significantly improved. Motivated by the investigation, we developed a new repair technique sharpFix that follows ssFix's basic idea but differs significantly in the approaches used for code search and code reuse. We compared sharpFix and ssFix on the Defects4J dataset and confirmed through experiments that (1) sharpFix's code search and code reuse approaches are better than ssFix's approaches and (2) sharpFix can do better repair. sharpFix successfully repaired a total of 36 Defects4J bugs and outperformed many existing repair techniques in repairing more bugs. We also compared sharpFix, ssFix, and four other techniques on another dataset Bugs.jar-ELIXIR. Our results show that sharpFix did better than others and repaired the largest number of bugs.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
