Henrique Rocha; Marco Tulio Valente. How Annotations are Used in Java: An Empirical Study. 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), p. 426-431, 2011.
Have fun!
===================
The following review has been automatically generated by a program.
The goal is to make fun of certain reviews made by certain reviewers in certain conferences.
Do not use this in your real reviews.
Enjoy!
*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*=--=*
The major problem with this paper is that there is nothing new here. A lot of this has already been proposed before. Some examples that come to mind are: just to name a few.
The paper talks about "...textual search program to find annotation...", but I haven't seen any discussion on that (whether in the theoretical part of the paper nor in the validation part). It is just mentioned. For this kind of work, this is _relevant_ how an approach can deal with that.
Some of the well-known concepts have been just renamed: "system" is nothing else than "complex, interlacement, mesh"; "class" is "caste, estate, folk"; parts of the approach have not even gotten a name.
The paper uses the term "class." Class has been used in the context of AOP developed by Crista Lopes et al. The paper cannot use the same term and generate confusion (in many dimensions). A simple google search would have helped with the naming.
The techniques are explained at a rather shallow level. No details. So, for example, what's the precise definition of "annotation"? How is system related to annotation? The paper talks about method, but why is that important? The role of "code" in the approach is not clear. When the paper gets to a bit more detail on these things, it stops abruptly.
The paper does not provide enough details for the work to be reproducible.
The difference to Google annotation system facility is also not discussed.
I could not understand Fig 1; this kind of "visualization" is not effective (and also not intuitive).
