research-article

A study on the most popular questions about concurrent programming

Authors:

Weslley Torres,

Fernando CastorAuthors Info & Claims

PLATEAU 2015: Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools

Pages 39 - 46

https://doi.org/10.1145/2846680.2846687

Published: 26 October 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Concurrent programming is notably known as a hard discipline. Over the last few years, great strides have been made in improving concurrent programming abstractions, techniques, and tools to ease concurrent programming practice. However, little effort has been placed on assessing what are the real-world problems faced by developers when writing concurrent applications. In this paper, we describe an empirical investigation of the top-250 most popular questions about concurrent programming on StackOverflow. We observed that even though some questions (22.94%) are related to practical problems (e.g., “how to fix this concurrency bug”), most of them (66.23%) are related to basic concepts (e.g., “what is a mutex?”), which were created by well- experienced StackOverflow users. Curiously, we did not find any question about how to use concurrent programming techniques to improve application performance.

References

[1]

A. Barua, S. Thomas, and A. Hassan. What are developers talking about? an analysis of topics and trends in stack overflow. EMSE, 2012.

Digital Library

[2]

T. David, R. Guerraoui, and V. Trigonakis. Everything you always wanted to know about synchronization but were afraid to ask. In SOSP, 2013.

Digital Library

[3]

J. Fereday and E. Muir-Cochrane. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative, 5, 2006.

[4]

P. Fleming and J. Wallace. How not to lie with statistics: The correct way to summarize benchmark results. Commun. ACM, 29(3):218–221, Mar. 1986. ISSN 0001-0782.

Digital Library

[5]

D. Friedman and D. Wise. The Impact of Applicative Programming on Multiprocessing. Technical report. Indiana University, Computer Science Department, 1976.

[6]

B. Goetz, T. Peierls, J. Bloch, J. Bowbeer, D. Holmes, and D. Lea. Java Concurrency in Practice. Addison-Wesley, 2006.

Digital Library

[7]

D. Huo, T. Ding, C. McMillan, and M. Gethers. An empirical study of the effects of expert knowledge on bug reports. In ICSME, 2014.

Digital Library

[8]

S. P. Jones. Parallel implementations of functional programming languages. The Computer Journal, 32(2):175–186, 1989.

Digital Library

[9]

D. Kester, M. Mwebesa, and J. Bradbury. How good is static analysis at finding concurrency bugs? In SCAM, pages 115– 124, Sept 2010.

Digital Library

[10]

A. Kulkarni, Y. Liu, and S. Smith. Task types for pervasive atomicity. In OOPSLA, 2010.

Digital Library

[11]

T. LaToza and B. Myers. Hard-to-answer questions about code. In PLATEAU, pages 8:1–8:6, 2010.

Digital Library

[12]

D. Lea. Concurrent Programming in Java. Design Principles and Patterns. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing., 2nd edition, 1999.

Digital Library

[13]

D. Lea. A java fork/join framework. In Java Grande, 2000.

Digital Library

[14]

S. Lu, S. Park, E. Seo, and Y. Zhou. Learning from mistakes: A comprehensive study on real world concurrency bug characteristics. In ASPLOS, 2008.

Digital Library

[15]

P. McKenney. Is Parallel Programming Hard, And, If So, What Can You Do About It? kernel.org, Corvallis, OR, USA, 1st edition, 2014. URL http://kernel.org/pub/linux/ kernel/people/paulmck/perfbook/perfbook.html.

[16]

P. Morrison and E. Murphy-Hill. Is programming knowledge related to age? an exploration of stack overflow. In MSR, 2013.

Digital Library

[17]

S. Okur, D. Hartveld, D. Dig, and A. Deursen. A study and toolkit for asynchronous programming in c#. In ICSE, 2014.

Digital Library

[18]

V. Pankratius and A.-R. Adl-Tabatabai. Software engineering with transactional memory versus locks in practice. Theory of Computing Systems, 55(3):555–590, 2014. ISSN 1432-4350.

Digital Library

[19]

V. Pankratius, F. Schmidt, and G. Garreton. Combining functional and imperative programming for multicore software: An empirical study evaluating scala and java. In ICSE, 2012.

Digital Library

[20]

G. Pinto and F. Kamei. What programmers say about refactoring tools? an empirical investigation of stack overflow. In WRT, 2013.

Digital Library

[21]

G. Pinto, F. Castor, and Y. Liu. Mining questions about software energy consumption. In MSR, 2014.

Digital Library

[22]

G. Pinto, F. Castor, and Y. Liu. Understanding energy behaviors of thread management constructs. In OOPSLA, 2014.

Digital Library

[23]

G. Pinto, W. Torres, B. Fernandes, F. Castor, and R. S. Barros. A large-scale study on the usage of javas concurrent programming constructs. Journal of Systems and Software, 106(0):59 – 81, 2015. ISSN 0164-1212.

Digital Library

[24]

C. J. Rossbach, O. S. Hofmann, and E. Witchel. Is transactional programming actually easier? In PPoPP, 2010.

Digital Library

[25]

A. Stefik and S. Hanenberg. The programming language wars: Questions and responsibilities for the programming language community. In Onward!, pages 283–299, 2014.

Digital Library

[26]

H. Sutter and J. Larus. Software and the concurrency revolution. Queue, 3(7):54–62, Sept. 2005. ISSN 1542-7730.

Digital Library

[27]

J. von Neumann. First draft of a report on the edvac. IEEE Ann. Hist. Comput., 15(4):27–75, Oct. 1993. ISSN 1058- 6180.

Digital Library

Cited By

Midolo ATramontana E(2023)An Automatic Transformer from Sequential to Parallel Java CodeFuture Internet10.3390/fi1509030615:9(306)Online publication date: 8-Sep-2023
https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15090306
Abid CGaaloul KKessentini MAlizadeh V(2022)What Refactoring Topics Do Developers Discuss? A Large Scale Empirical Study Using Stack OverflowIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.314003610(56362-56374)Online publication date: 2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3140036
Openja MAdams BKhomh F(2020)Analysis of Modern Release Engineering Topics : – A Large-Scale Study using StackOverflow –2020 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00020(104-114)Online publication date: Sep-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00020
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

A study on the most popular questions about concurrent programming
1. Information systems
  1. Information systems applications

Recommendations

Concurrent programming without locks

Mutual exclusion locks remain the de facto mechanism for concurrency control on shared-memory data structures. However, their apparent simplicity is deceptive: It is hard to design scalable locking strategies because locks can harbor problems such as ...
Execution privatization for scheduler-oblivious concurrent programs
OOPSLA '12

Making multithreaded execution less non-deterministic is a promising solution to address the difficulty of concurrent programming plagued by the non-deterministic thread scheduling. In fact, a vast category of concurrent programs are scheduler-oblivious:...
Execution privatization for scheduler-oblivious concurrent programs
OOPSLA '12: Proceedings of the ACM international conference on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications

Making multithreaded execution less non-deterministic is a promising solution to address the difficulty of concurrent programming plagued by the non-deterministic thread scheduling. In fact, a vast category of concurrent programs are scheduler-oblivious:...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

PLATEAU 2015: Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools

October 2015

67 pages

ISBN:9781450339070

DOI:10.1145/2846680

Copyright © 2015 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]

Sponsors

SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages

In-Cooperation

SIGAda: ACM Special Interest Group on Ada Programming Language

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 26 October 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

SPLASH '15

Sponsor:

SIGPLAN

SPLASH '15: Conference on Systems, Programming, Languages, and Applications: Software for Humanity

October 26, 2015

PA, Pittsburgh, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 5 of 8 submissions, 63%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

19
Total Citations
View Citations
254
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)24
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8

Reflects downloads up to 18 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Midolo ATramontana E(2023)An Automatic Transformer from Sequential to Parallel Java CodeFuture Internet10.3390/fi1509030615:9(306)Online publication date: 8-Sep-2023
https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15090306
Abid CGaaloul KKessentini MAlizadeh V(2022)What Refactoring Topics Do Developers Discuss? A Large Scale Empirical Study Using Stack OverflowIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.314003610(56362-56374)Online publication date: 2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3140036
Openja MAdams BKhomh F(2020)Analysis of Modern Release Engineering Topics : – A Large-Scale Study using StackOverflow –2020 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00020(104-114)Online publication date: Sep-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00020
Kruger JHebig R(2020)What Developers (Care to) Recall: An Interview Survey on Smaller Systems2020 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME)10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00015(46-57)Online publication date: Sep-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00015
Chinnakali MPalisetti SChandrasekaran K(2020)Organising the knowledge from stack overflow about location‐sensing of Android applicationsIET Software10.1049/iet-sen.2019.028414:3(221-233)Online publication date: Jun-2020
https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen.2019.0284
van den Haak LWijs Avan den Brand MHuisman M(2020)Formal Methods for GPGPU Programming: Is the Demand Met?Integrated Formal Methods10.1007/978-3-030-63461-2_9(160-177)Online publication date: 13-Nov-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63461-2_9
C MChimalakonda SK C(2020)How do open source app developers perceive API changes related to Android battery optimization? An empirical studySoftware: Practice and Experience10.1002/spe.292851:4(691-710)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2020
https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.2928
Martinez MTilevich E(2019)Two datasets of questions and answers for studying the development of cross-platform mobile applications using Xamarin frameworkProceedings of the 6th International Conference on Mobile Software Engineering and Systems10.5555/3340730.3340763(162-173)Online publication date: 25-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3340730.3340763
Bagherzadeh MKhatchadourian RDumas MPfahl DApel SRusso A(2019)Going big: a large-scale study on what big data developers askProceedings of the 2019 27th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering10.1145/3338906.3338939(432-442)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3338906.3338939
Dilley NLange J(2019)An Empirical Study of Messaging Passing Concurrency in Go Projects2019 IEEE 26th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER)10.1109/SANER.2019.8668036(377-387)Online publication date: Feb-2019
https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER.2019.8668036
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents