arXiv subjects

Sérgio Queiroz de Medeiros

Publications and source records attributed to Sérgio Queiroz de Medeiros.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

Towards Automatic Error Recovery in Parsing Expression

Error recovery is an essential feature for a parser that should be plugged in Integrated Development Environments (IDEs), which must build Abstract Syntax Trees (ASTs) even for syntactically invalid programs in order to offer features such as automated refactoring and code completion. Parsing Expressions Grammars (PEGs) are a formalism that naturally describes recursive top-down parsers using a restricted form of backtracking. Labeled failures are a conservative extension of PEGs that adds an error reporting mechanism for PEG parsers, and these labels can also be associated with recovery expressions to also be an error recovery mechanism. These expressions can use the full expressivity of PEGs to recover from syntactic errors. Manually annotating a large grammar with labels and recovery expressions can be difficult. In this work, we present an algorithm that automatically annotates a PEG with labels, and builds their corresponding recovery expressions. We evaluate this algorithm by adding error recovery to the parser of the Titan programming language. The results shown that with a small amount of manual intervention our algorithm can be used to produce error recovering parsers for PEGs where most of the alternatives are disjoint.

cs.PL↗

arXiv2024

Investigating the Energy Consumption of C++ and Java Solutions Mined from a Programming Contest Site

The concern about global warming increased the interest in the energy efficiency of computer applications. Assuming power is constant, the general trend is that faster programs consume less energy, thus optimizing a program for speed would also improve its energy efficiency. We investigate this tendency in a set of C++ and Java solutions mined from Code Submission Evaluation System (CSES), a popular programming competition site, where each solution must give the correct answer under a given time limit. In such context, we can consider that all correct solutions for a problem were written with a speed concern, but not with energy efficiency in mind. We selected 15 problems from CSES and for each of them we mined at least 30 C++ and Java solutions, evaluating time and energy efficiency of each solution in at least two different machines. In our scenario, where there is a great diversity of programming styles, execution speed, and memory usage, we could confirm the general trend: faster programs consume less energy. Moreover, we were able to use ordinary least squares to fit a linear function, with good precision, that relates energy consumption of a program based on its execution time, as well as to automatically identify programs with abnormal energy consumption. A manual analysis of these programs revealed that often they perform a different amount of allocation and deallocation operations when compared to programs with similar execution times. We also calculated the energy consumption profile of sets of random C++ solutions for these 15 CSES problems, and we tried to associate each set with its corresponding CSES problem by using the energy consumption profiles previously computed for each one of them. With this approach, we restricted, for each set of random C++ solutions, the classification task to a subset of 7 CSES problems, a reduction of more than 50% in the search space.

cs.PL↗

arXiv2024

How do Machine Learning Projects use Continuous Integration Practices? An Empirical Study on GitHub Actions

Continuous Integration (CI) is a well-established practice in traditional software development, but its nuances in the domain of Machine Learning (ML) projects remain relatively unexplored. Given the distinctive nature of ML development, understanding how CI practices are adopted in this context is crucial for tailoring effective approaches. In this study, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of 185 open-source projects on GitHub (93 ML and 92 non-ML projects). Our investigation comprises both quantitative and qualitative dimensions, aiming to uncover differences in CI adoption between ML and non-ML projects. Our findings indicate that ML projects often require longer build durations, and medium-sized ML projects exhibit lower test coverage compared to non-ML projects. Moreover, small and medium-sized ML projects show a higher prevalence of increasing build duration trends compared to their non-ML counterparts. Additionally, our qualitative analysis illuminates the discussions around CI in both ML and non-ML projects, encompassing themes like CI Build Execution and Status, CI Testing, and CI Infrastructure. These insights shed light on the unique challenges faced by ML projects in adopting CI practices effectively.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2019

Automatic Syntax Error Reporting and Recovery in Parsing Expression Grammars

Error recovery is an essential feature for a parser that should be plugged in Integrated Development Environments (IDEs), which must build Abstract Syntax Trees (ASTs) even for syntactically invalid programs in order to offer features such as automated refactoring and code completion. Parsing Expressions Grammars (PEGs) are a formalism that naturally describes recursive top-down parsers using a restricted form of backtracking. Labeled failures are a conservative extension of PEGs that adds an error reporting mechanism for PEG parsers, and these labels can also be associated with recovery expressions to provide an error recovery mechanism. These expressions can use the full expressivity of PEGs to recover from syntactic errors. Manually annotating a large grammar with labels and recovery expressions can be difficult. In this work, we present two approaches, Standard and Unique, to automatically annotate a PEG with labels, and to build their corresponding recovery expressions. The Standard approach annotates a grammar in a way similar to manual annotation, but it may insert labels incorrectly, while the Unique approach is more conservative to annotate a grammar and does not insert labels incorrectly. We evaluate both approaches by using them to generate error recovering parsers for four programming languages: Titan, C, Pascal and Java. In our evaluation, the parsers produced using the Standard approach, after a manual intervention to remove the labels incorrectly added, gave an acceptable recovery for at least 70% of the files in each language. By it turn, the acceptable recovery rate of the parsers produced via the Unique approach, without the need of manual intervention, ranged from 41% to 76%.

cs.PL↗