Automatic Code Failure Analysis via Option Subsetting
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Code authors and editors face difficulties in identifying and resolving incompatibilities between code and code development options, leading to resource-intensive investigations and the forgoing of performance optimizations due to tedious error detection in larger codebases.
Innovation Solution
Automatically selecting subsets of code development options and successively applying them to the code, recording results to analyze which options are incompatible, allowing for efficient identification of incompatibilities without sacrificing performance improvements.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If code development options are applied to optimize software performance, then performance improvement is achieved, but code errors are exposed and incompatibilities arise
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary failure analysis by automatically testing code development options before they are fully adopted. It proactively identifies incompatible options and potential errors in advance, allowing developers to prepare solutions beforehand rather than reacting to failures after they occur.
Solution Approach 2:
The system provides feedback by analyzing the results of applying code development options and automatically identifying incompatibilities. This feedback loop allows developers to see which options work together and which cause errors, enabling informed decisions about optimization strategies.
2Measurement precision
If manual investigation of code errors is performed, then error identification is achieved, but time and resources are consumed
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs self-service failure analysis by automatically executing code development options and analyzing results without requiring manual intervention. It autonomously identifies incompatibilities and generates reports, freeing developers from tedious manual investigation while maintaining high detection accuracy.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual mechanical investigation with automated computer-based analysis. Instead of developers manually reviewing code and testing options, the system uses automated execution and analysis mechanisms to identify errors and incompatibilities, significantly reducing time consumption.
3Manufacturing precision
If all code development options are tested manually, then complete analysis is achieved, but resource expenditure becomes unaffordable
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the comprehensive testing process into manageable portions by automatically executing and analyzing individual code development options separately. This segmentation allows complete analysis of all options without requiring proportional manual resources, as each option is processed efficiently through automation.
Solution Approach 2:
The system changes the parameter of analysis from manual human evaluation to automated computer execution. This parameter change enables complete testing of all code development options at scale, as automated systems can process multiple options simultaneously without the resource constraints that limit manual analysis.
Data Source
AI summary
Sweeping through the code development options of a code development command allows diagnosis of a failure resulting from execution of the code development command on a given code. Successively modifying the code development command, such as successively removing code development options, automatically allows efficient examination of a failure. Executing each modified version of the code development command and recording results of the executions generates information that can expeditiously identify correspondence between a failure and one or more of the code development options.