Bug finding tools can find defects in software source code using an automated static analysis. This automation may be able to reduce the time spent for other testing and review activities. For this we need to have a clear understanding of how the defects found by bug finding tools relate to the defects found by other techniques. This paper describes a case study using several projects mainly from an industrial environment that were used to analyse the interrelationships. The main finding is that the bug finding tools predominantly find different defects than testing but a subset of defects found by reviews. However, the types that can be detected are analysed more thoroughly. Therefore, a combination is most advisable if the high number of false positives of the tools can be tolerated.
An interesting combination of static analysis tools and testing in described in @cite_8 . It is proposed to use static analysis to find potential problems and automatically generate test cases to verify if there is a real defect. However, the approach obviously does not work with maintenance-related defects.
@cite_8
2141790816 2107024044 2125343911 2082314767
Automated static analysis is a promising technique to detect defects in software. However, although considerable effort has been spent for developing sophisticated detection possibilities, the effectiveness and efficiency has not been treated in equal detail. This paper presents the results of two industrial case studies in which two tools based on bug patterns for Java are applied and evaluated. First, the economic implications of the tools are analysed. It is estimated that only 3-4 potential field defects need to be detected for the tools to be cost-efficient. Second, the capabilities of detecting field defects are investigated. No field defects have been found that could have been detected by the tools. Third, the identification of fault-prone classes based on the results of such tools is investigated and found to be possible. Finally, methodological consequences are derived from the results and experiences in order to improve the use of bug pattern tools in practice. No single software fault-detection technique is capable of addressing all fault-detection concerns. Similarly to software reviews and testing, static analysis tools (or automated static analysis) can be used to remove defects prior to release of a software product. To determine to what extent automated static analysis can help in the economic production of a high-quality product, we have analyzed static analysis faults and test and customer-reported failures for three large-scale industrial software systems developed at Nortel Networks. The data indicate that automated static analysis is an affordable means of software fault detection. Using the orthogonal defect classification scheme, we found that automated static analysis is effective at identifying assignment and checking faults, allowing the later software production phases to focus on more complex, functional, and algorithmic faults. A majority of the defects found by automated static analysis appear to be produced by a few key types of programmer errors and some of these types have the potential to cause security vulnerabilities. Statistical analysis results indicate the number of automated static analysis faults can be effective for identifying problem modules. Our results indicate static analysis tools are complementary to other fault-detection techniques for the economic production of a high-quality software product. Static analysis tools for software defect detection are becoming widely used in practice. However, there is little public information regarding the experimental evaluation of the accuracy and value of the warnings these tools report. In this paper, we discuss the warnings found by FindBugs, a static analysis tool that finds defects in Java programs. We discuss the kinds of warnings generated and the classification of warnings into false positives, trivial bugs and serious bugs. We also provide some insight into why static analysis tools often detect true but trivial bugs, and some information about defect warnings across the development lifetime of software release. We report data on the defect warnings in Sun's Java 6 JRE, in Sun's Glassfish JEE server, and in portions of Google's Java codebase. Finally, we report on some experiences from incorporating static analysis into the software development process at Google. During software development it is helpful to obtain early estimates of the defect density of software components. Such estimates identify fault-prone areas of code requiring further testing. We present an empirical approach for the early prediction of pre-release defect density based on the defects found using static analysis tools. The defects identified by two different static analysis tools are used to fit and predict the actual pre-release defect density for Windows Server 2003. We show that there exists a strong positive correlation between the static analysis defect density and the pre-release defect density determined by testing. Further, the predicted pre-release defect density and the actual pre-release defect density are strongly correlated at a high degree of statistical significance. Discriminant analysis shows that the results of static analysis tools can be used to separate high and low quality components with an overall classification rate of 82.91 .