skip to main content
10.1145/800045.801622acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Documentation of concurrent programs

Published:12 December 1983Publication History

ABSTRACT

A complete software package always includes documentation. Although its importance is often overlooked, documentation may be the only source of program design information. Major tasks in the software life cycle, such as design, coding, testing and maintenance, are often performed by different individuals. Lientz and Swanson (1979) found that, typically, only about half of a software system's maintenance personnel had been involved in its development. Poor documentation techniques can, therefore, dramatically increase labor costs throughout the labor intensive software life cycle by making both development and maintenance tasks more difficult.

Recent research in this area (Boehm-Davis, Sheppard, & Bailey, 1982; Sheppard, Kruesi, & Bailey, in press; Sheppard, Kruesi, & Curtis, 1981) has been directed toward determining performance on a set of software tasks as a function of the type of documentation. In these studies, programmer performance was examined on comprehension, coding, debugging, and modification tasks as a function of the type of documentation provided. The documentation formats were constructed from the factorial combination of three types of symbology with three types of spatial arrangement. These formats were chosen because they represent the primary dimensions for categorizing the way in which available documentation aids configure the information they present to programmers (Jones, 1979). The three types of symbology in which information was presented consisted of normal English, abbreviated English (such as program design language), and ideograms. The spatial arrangements of the information used in these experiments were sequential, branching, and hierarchical. While each of the four tasks pursued in this research produced slightly different results, there was a general trend towards the superiority of succinct symbology and a branching spatial arrangement in each.

References

  1. 1.Boehm-Davis, D. A., Sheppard, S. B., & Bailey, J. W. An empirical evaluation of language-tailored PDLs. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society. Santa Monica, CA: The Human Factors Society, 1982, 984-988.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. 2.Davies, O. L. The design and analysis of industrial experiments. Oliver & Boyd, 1956.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.Jones, C. A survey of programming design and specification techniques. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Specifications of Reliable Software. New York: IEEE, 1979.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.Lientz, B. P. & Swanson, E. G. The use of productivity aids in system development and maintenance (Technical Report 79-1). Los Angeles, CA: UCLA, Graduate School of Management, 1979.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.McCabe, T. J. A complexity measure. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1976, 2, 308-320.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.Sheppard, S. B., Kruesi, E., & Bailey, J.W. An empirical evaluation of software documentation formats. In J. Thomas, & M. Schneider (Eds.), Human Factors in Computer Systems. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp., in press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Sheppard, S. B., Kruesi, E., & Curtis, B. The effects of symbology and spatial arrangement on the comprehension of software specifications. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Software Engineering, San Diego, CA: IEEE, 1981. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.Winer, B. J. Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Documentation of concurrent programs

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              CHI '83: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
              December 1983
              306 pages
              ISBN:0897911210
              DOI:10.1145/800045

              Copyright © 1983 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 12 December 1983

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • Article

              Acceptance Rates

              CHI '83 Paper Acceptance Rate59of176submissions,34%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%
            • Article Metrics

              • Downloads (Last 12 months)26
              • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

              Other Metrics

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader