Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Handle historical methods #106

Closed
yiming-tang-cs opened this issue Nov 21, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Handle historical methods #106

yiming-tang-cs opened this issue Nov 21, 2018 · 5 comments
Labels
duplicate This issue or pull request already exists
Milestone

Comments

@yiming-tang-cs
Copy link
Contributor

For some methods which are in the git history but they have no corresponding methods in the current source code, they should be considered carefully to bump the DOI values.

Current source code:
Class p{
    m1(){…}
    m2()(…)
    m4()(…)
}

For example, each operation on the method will increase the DOI value of the method by 1 but decrease the DOI values of other methods by 0.5.

The interaction event history:
1. add m1()
2. add m2()
3. add m3()
4. modify m3()
5. delete m3()
6. add m4()

The DOI values:
m1(): 0
m2(): 0
m4(): 1

If we ignore m3(), the DOI values:
m1(): 0
m2(): 0.5
m4(): 1

@khatchad
Copy link
Member

@saledouble How are you getting these numbers and are they decaying on their own?

@yiming-tang-cs
Copy link
Contributor Author

I just use this as an example. The numbers are not important, and they are just used to show how their algorithm works. Actually, when I manually added a event into a task context, it would increase the DOI value of relevant method by 1.

image

For each time the DOI values is update, the decay is also computed. In the algorithm, SCALING(KIND-DECAY) is a constant. The value of decay is based on how many events from the fist relevant event to the latest events.

@khatchad khatchad changed the title Need to process historical methods carefully Handle historical methods Nov 21, 2018
@khatchad khatchad added the question Further information is requested label Nov 21, 2018
@khatchad
Copy link
Member

khatchad commented Nov 21, 2018 via email

@khatchad
Copy link
Member

As discussed, ignore these for now.

@yiming-tang-cs yiming-tang-cs added this to the Future milestone Dec 11, 2018
@khatchad
Copy link
Member

khatchad commented Jan 8, 2019

Dupe of #98.

@khatchad khatchad closed this as completed Jan 8, 2019
@khatchad khatchad added duplicate This issue or pull request already exists and removed question Further information is requested labels Jan 8, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
duplicate This issue or pull request already exists
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants