Challenges of Implementing Software Variability in Eclipse OMR: An Interview Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Software variability is the ability of a software system to be customized or configured for a particular context. In this paper, we discuss our experience investigating software variability implementation challenges in practice. Eclipse OMR, developed by IBM, is a set of highly configurable C++ components for building language runtimes; it supports multiple programming languages and target architectures. We conduct an interview study with 6 Eclipse OMR developers and identify 8 challenges incurred by the existing variability implementation, and 3 constraints that need to be taken into account for any reengineering effort. We discuss these challenges and investigate the literature and existing open-source systems for potential solutions. We contribute a solution for one of the challenges, namely adding variability to enumerations and arrays. We also share our experiences and lessons learned working with a large-scale highly configurable industry project. For example, we found that the "latest and greatest" research solutions may not always be favoured by developers due to small practical considerations such as build dependencies, or even C++ version constraints.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it