Paper detail

A Quick Repair Facility for Debugging

Modern development environments provide a widely used auto-correction facility for quickly repairing syntactic errors. Auto-correction cannot deal with semantic errors, which are much more difficult to repair. Automated program repair techniques, designed for repairing semantic errors, are not well-suited for interactive use while debugging, as they typically assume the existence of a high-quality test suite and take considerable time. To bridge the gap, we developed ROSE, a tool to suggest quick-yet-effective repairs of semantic errors during debugging. ROSE does not rely on a test suite. Instead, it assumes a debugger stopping point where a problem is observed. It asks the developer to quickly describe what is wrong, performs a light-weight fault localization to identify potential responsible locations, and uses a generate-and-validate strategy to produce and validate repairs. Finally, it presents the results so the developer can choose and make the appropriate repair. To assess its utility, we implemented a prototype of ROSE that works in the Eclipse IDE and applied it to two benchmarks, QuixBugs and Defects4J, for repair. ROSE was able to suggest correct repairs for 17 QuixBugs and 16 Defects4J errors in seconds.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.