[Submitted on 16 Apr 2025 (v1), last revised 23 Apr 2025 (this version, v2)]
Authors:Audris Mockus, Peter C Rigby, Rui Abreu, Anatoly Akkerman, Yogesh Bhootada, Payal Bhuptani, Gurnit Ghardhora, Lan Hoang Dao, Chris Hawley, Renzhi He, Sagar Krishnamoorthy, Sergei Krauze, Jianmin Li, Anton Lunov, Dragos Martac, Francois Morin, Neil Mitchell, Venus Montes, Maher Saba, Matt Steiner, Andrea Valori, Shanchao Wang, Nachiappan Nagappan
to reveal a range of practices used for continual improvement of the codebase. In addition, we replicate several aspects of previous industry cases studies investigating the impact of code reengineering. Results: Code improvements at Meta range from completely organic grass-roots done at the initiative of individual engineers, to regularly blocked time and engagement via gamification of Better Engineering (BE) work, to major explicit initiatives aimed at reengineering the complex parts of the codebase or deleting accumulations of dead code. Over 14% of changes are explicitly devoted to code improvement and the developers are given ``badges'' to acknowledge the type of work and the amount of effort. Our investigation to prioritize which parts of the codebase to improve lead to the development of metrics to guide this decision making. Our analysis of the impact of reengineering activities revealed substantial improvements in quality and speed as well as a reduction in code complexity. Overall, such continual improvement is an effective way to develop software with rapid releases, while maintaining high quality.
Submission history
From: Audris Mockus [view email]
[v1]
Wed, 16 Apr 2025 22:30:54 UTC (605 KB)
[v2]
Wed, 23 Apr 2025 15:58:21 UTC (601 KB)