Software Re-Engineering
Assignment No. 4
Bilal Yousaf
SP22-BSE-041
Section: B
Sir Muhammad Fawad
11/12/2024
Question 1: Limitations of Current Software Re-Engineering Tools:
1. Inflexibility: Many tools are designed for specific programming languages or
technologies, limiting their usability across diverse environments.
Example: SonarQube supports popular languages like Java, Python, and
JavaScript but has limited coverage for niche or legacy languages like COBOL or
ABAP.
Limitation: Tools may not be extensible to less-common or domain-specific
programming languages.
2. Lack of Automation: They often require significant manual input for tasks such as
dependency resolution and refactoring, which reduces efficiency.
Example: Understand by SciTools provides deep code analysis but lacks
automated large-scale refactoring features.
3. Limited Refactoring Capabilities: Refactoring is complex due to lack of semantic
understanding of the code, inability to handle legacy systems, or inadequate support for
modular changes.
Example: Eclipse Refactoring Tools work well for Java but struggle with deeply
coupled legacy systems.
Limitation: They can't address architectural-level refactoring automatically.
4. Scalability Issues: Tools may struggle with large codebases or complex architectures.
Example: Tools like SonarQube may slow down or produce incomplete reports
when analyzing large, complex codebases.
5. Inadequate Visualization: Poor visual representations hinder understanding of code
dependencies, data flows, and architectural designs.
Example: ArgoUML provides UML diagrams but lacks dynamic and interactive
features for exploring dependencies.
Question 2: Enhancements to Visualizations in Re-Engineering Tools:
1. Interactive Graphs: Use dynamic, zoomable graphs to represent dependencies, class
hierarchies, or data flows.
Example: Structure101 provides graphical representations of dependencies,
though they can be further improved with interactivity.
2. Heat Maps: Show areas of code with the most technical debt or complexity.
Example: CodeScene effectively uses heat maps to showcase code hotspots.
3. Timeline Views: Allow users to see how code or architecture has evolved over time.
Limitation: Timeline visualizations are generally missing in tools like
SonarQube or Eclipse and could help track architectural evolution.
4. Customizable Dashboards: Let users tailor views to focus on specific areas, such as
metrics or code smells.
Example: SonarQube provides some custom dashboards but could expand their
scope.
5. Integration with IDEs: Provide seamless visualization while coding.
Example: IntelliJ IDEA integrates UML diagrams but could benefit from more
intuitive, contextual dependency maps.
Question 3: Optimizing Re-Engineering Tools for Multi-Language and Framework
Support:
1. Plug-in Architecture: Allow third-party developers to add language or framework
support easily.
Example: Eclipse IDE supports plugins, but some languages (e.g., Rust) have
limited community-developed options.
2. Common Intermediate Representation (CIR): Translate all code into a unified
intermediate form for analysis and refactoring.
Example: LLVM Framework uses CIR effectively but is more compiler-focused
than suited for re-engineering tasks.
3. AI-Driven Language Adaptation: Use machine learning to infer syntax and semantics
for less-common languages.
Limitation: Tools like SonarQube don’t use AI to infer patterns in unsupported
languages.
4. Standardized APIs: Ensure tools can integrate with external parsers and compilers for
various languages.
Limitation: Tools often lack robust APIs for language-agnostic extensibility.
5. Modular Design: Keep language-specific logic separate from core functionalities for
easier updates.
Example: JetBrains IntelliJ Platform modularizes language support effectively.
Question 4: Primary Challenges and Solutions:
1. Steep Learning Curve: Simplify user interfaces and provide thorough documentation
and tutorials.
Example: Understand by SciTools provides powerful features but can be
overwhelming for new users.
Solution: Incorporate guided walkthroughs and contextual help systems.
2. Tool Performance: Optimize algorithms for faster analysis and processing of large
codebases.
Example: SonarQube struggles with highly complex monolithic systems.
Solution: Optimize algorithms and enable incremental analysis.
3. Incomplete Documentation: Ensure the tools are well-documented and include
community support.
Example: CodeScene provides innovative visualizations but lacks comprehensive
guidance for all features.
Solution: Develop robust documentation and community forums.
4. Integration Issues: Build plugins and APIs for seamless integration with development
workflows.
Example: ArgoUML does not directly integrate with modern DevOps workflows.
Solution: Provide plugins or APIs for tools like Jenkins or GitHub Actions.
5. Trust in Outputs: Enhance tool accuracy through rigorous testing and better
explanations for suggestions.
Example: SonarQube sometimes flags false positives in code smells.
Solution: Improve accuracy and provide detailed justifications for tool outputs.
Question 5: Improving User Experience in Re-Engineering Tools:
1. Intuitive Interfaces: Design UIs that are user-friendly, with clear layouts and logical
workflows.
Example: IntelliJ IDEA provides a user-friendly experience but could offer
more inline previews of refactoring impacts.
2. Context-Aware Suggestions: Provide refactoring recommendations based on the
specific code context.
Example: ReSharper delivers context-specific suggestions effectively but lacks
customization for unique project requirements.
3. Collaborative Features: Enable team-based reviews and annotations within the tool.
Limitation: Most tools, including SonarQube, lack robust collaborative features.
4. Real-Time Feedback: Allow users to see the impact of changes instantly.
Example: Eclipse IDE provides basic syntax checking in real-time but could
expand to show broader architectural impacts instantly.
5. Customizable Workflows: Let users configure the tool to match their project needs and
coding practices.
Limitation: Customization options are limited in tools like Structure101
compared to the needs of diverse projects.
