

SEED: Software Engineering Evidence Database - cipher0
http://evidencebasedse.com/

======
mathattack
I'm curious from anyone who has read through these... How solid scientific
footing are these on? Is it closer to mathematics, or closer to psychology?
(Proofs tend to stick more in the former than the latter)

~~~
chas
If you want an overview of the ideas behind this sort of research and a quick
summary of some results, Greg Wilson gave a great talk on it[0].

I haven't read through the site to see what is there, but software engineering
methodology and technique research* uses techniques from research of
management techniques in business, making it closer to psychology or
sociology. For more information, the blog "It Will Never Work in Theory"[1]
does a good job of highlighting these sorts of results that are directly
useful and has some explanation of the tools they are using to study software
engineering practices. The book _Making Software_ [2] goes into much more
detail on software engineering research methodologies if you are interested.

*As opposed to CS theory research that could be used in software engineering, which is usually math.

[0] [http://vimeo.com/9270320](http://vimeo.com/9270320) [1]
[http://neverworkintheory.org/index.html](http://neverworkintheory.org/index.html)
[2]
[http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596808303.do](http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596808303.do)

~~~
mathattack
Thanks! I had Making Software on my bookshelf, and someone "borrowed" it. I'll
need to "borrow" it back. :-) The challenge from it's intro was that anyone in
the field will overstate the truth in the research. I used to be a business
book junkie until I realized what weak foundation most of it was built on.
I've gradually come back to the genre but more for context and story than
predictive power.

The Halo Effect [0] amped up my skepticism. Of course it was a business book
[1] that introduced me to the Halo Effect... :-)

[0]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect)
[1] [http://www.amazon.com/The-Halo-Effect-Business-
Delusions/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Halo-Effect-Business-
Delusions/dp/0743291263)

------
klibertp
Nothing about readability... I guess there really are _no_ studies on what
readability is and how to measure it and how to write readable code :)

------
commentei29
quick review. my opinion can change. THUMBS DOWN. 1 out of 5 stars. why?
remember I am not as smart other disclaimers. THIS IS THE METHOD I AM USING
after 38 or so years and yes I have dropped the box with Fortran punch cards.
OOPS. 1.)it a human process - worthless. 2.)only human process worth while in
REAL time is this site and reddit dot com / haskell, etc. 3.)where is the
ontology? 4.)i also provide real perspective by a.)rosetta code - go ahead and
laugh but code translation is helpful especially between OOP python, C and FP
Haskell b.)encylopedia of int sequences. Help me find more mistakes in the int
sequences for I so far CANNOT FIND ANY.

8.)What a shame. the evidence of the Heartbleed Bug that broke the internet is
on git. One way to find the BLAME is git blame. What are the other THREE
WAYS???

9.)IMHO, it is NOT an EVIDENCE database. Provide evidence and a few toolsets.

10.)Even simple metrics like WHAT IS THE TREND LINE MOVING CHART like yahoo
finance stocks for 'changes', BUGS, vulnerabilities and HEAT MAP - changes.

11.)Heat map changes? a.) Coder stated design b.)goals and constraints c.)code
diff d.)code metrics - EVIDENCE e.)code analytics - EVIDENCE f.)redditc snarky
comments - sometimes evidence g.)....

No, the evidence does NOT have to be extreme detail, however the test
framework: S M A R T S for specific - related to ontology or BoK or ??? or ??
scrum? is needed. Haskell wording is VAGUE, context specific, scoping?,
strange logic - Template Haskell and Liquid, etc., etc.

haskell is an example. Engineering is the middle layer between the hacker -
anything goes technically to the Science and then to the Math.

~~~
CaveTech
I honestly have no idea what you're going on about.

