Mapping and visualization of source code a survey

NAKUL SHARMA et al: MAPPING AND VISUALIZATION OF SOURCE CODE: A SURVEY
DOI 10.5013/IJSSST.a.21.04.03 3.1 ISSN: 1473-804x online, 1473-8031 print
Mapping and Visualization of Source Code: A Survey
Nakul Sharma, Prasanth Yalla
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Koneru Laxmiah Education Foundation, Vijayawada, India.
e-mail: nakul777@gmail.com; prasanthyalla@kluniversity.in
Abstract - This paper summarizes various states of art literature in the field of mapping and visualizations in a programming
language. The main focus is the design and analysis phase of Software Development Life Cycle. Mapping and visualization in
software artifact is essential component for better understanding of the software. It also helps developers and maintenance
professionals to visualize the effect of changes conducted in source code. In this work, a summary of literature review in of major
tools developed for visualization and mapping of source code is provided.
Keywords - Source Code Analysis, Mapping, Visualization, Source Code Visualization, Software Comprehension
I. INTRODUCTION
Mapping and visualization of the software are useful for
the developer. In the object-oriented classes, the developer
gets help from the visual aspects of how data gets passed
from one class to another. In the case of procedural oriented
programming as well, how the data is manipulated by the
function can be seen by visual inspection done by the
developer. Source Code Analysis (SCA) is hence needed
for developers, especially for large projects. In this work,
the following tools are being examined which are made in
respect to software visualization:-
1. Kieker [1]
2. Octobubbles [2]
3. Umple [3]
4. Reprograms [4]
5. ClonEvol [5]
6. CVSscan [6]
7. Revision Tower [7]
8. 3-DSoftVis [16]
9. History Slicing [8]
10. RelVis [9]
11. Chronia [10]
12. Spectographs [11]
13. Evolution radar [12]
14. CodeCity [13]
A source code is created by the developer or a
programmer. However, the maintenance engineer has equal
stake in the source code. The maintenance engineer needs to
undertake the changes to the software. Thus in addition the
effect of changes also needs to be studied. If any support in
the form of a visualization tool can be provided, then it is
helpful to both developer as well the maintenance engineer.
II BACKGROUND
Mapping of the source code is done by making use of
different tools developed for the source code. The mapping
between the source code can be done either intra-document
or inter-document.
Mapping and visualization in the Software Development
Life Cycle have been continuous and evolving due to
various issues. Analysis artifacts are SRS, design phase has
SDS, and coding phase has source code. These artifacts
have natural language text or semi-natural language text as
the medium of communication. Keyphrase Extraction can
be used to extract relevant features from different API
documents and the source code. KE paves way for
interpretation and understanding using NLP models. There
are various alternative statistical and mathematical models
which help in interpretation. The analysis of API
documentation and the source code can hence help in
developing traceability links and provide an advantage to
the developers, analysts, and maintenance engineer. The
visualizations can help analyst, developer and maintenance
engineer in the following ways:
1. Advantages to the developer include:
- Ability to visualize the changes done on source code.
- Ability to check relevant linkage between the design
and source code developed.
- Visual inspection of large software projects helps in
better understanding.
2. Advantages to the Software Maintenance: Software
maintainers are tasked with introducing changeability
through Software Configuration Management (SCM). This
change is done by studying the end user's requirements.
Hence, software maintenance work involves the knowledge
of analysis, design, coding, and testing as well. A visual
inspection of source code can aid in a quick understanding
of how software changes can cause effects in different
phases of the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC).
In the analysis phase of agile development, these
visualizations are used in XP, SCRUM methodologies for
gaining better understandability of requirements. In the
design phase, the visualization and its corresponding

mappings are done by UML diagrams. UML diagrams aid
in providing a vision of software to be developed by the
developer. UML diagram address both the problem domain
as well as the solution domain of a project. Hence, its visual
representation is essential for giving an idea about the
software to be developed in the context of large projects. In
the coding phase of SDLC, there is a technique of Source
Code Analysis (SCA) which is done on the source code.
The developers get benefitted from such analysis techniques
as better clarity on the program flow and data flow is
obtained.
In the field of software testing, there are various
techniques such as the boundary value analysis (BVA) and
unit path testing which allows visualization of source code.
There are many tools both automated and semi-automated
tools which focus on the development of different skill sets.
Source Code Analysis (SCA) consists of model
construction, pattern knowledge, analysis, and pattern
recognition [15]. Model construction involves creating
Abstract Syntax Tree (AST), Concrete Syntax Tree (CST)
from the source code. The AST hence created forms the
basis for the next step in SCA. AST pattern knowledge and
recognition try to understand the pattern behind the source
code. Figure-1 shows the basic steps in SCA. This paper
hence tries to discuss such existing tools that are available
for the visualization and mapping of software.
Figure 1. Source Code Analysis Steps [15]
III. LITERATURE REVIEW
Table-I shows some of the tools developed, source code of
the software visualization tool, research methodologies used
in these tools.
Specific to UML Models, Octobubbles provides a
multidimensional view of the source code in a visual
environment. Octobubbles intends to show the parallel
visualization and synchronization of software models [2].
A. C/C++/Java Related Visualization Tool
ClonEval is a software tool which takes as input source
code written in C, C++ and Java programming language.
This tool undertakes evaluation of the input source code on
the parameters of project, file and scope. The visualization
includes making use of a mirrored tree for displaying the
file and its scope structures while the edges represent the
cluster relationships. The Doxygen and Simian are used in
the background for accomplishing the tasks of static
analyzer and code detector [3].
Kieker tool is developed for a web based GUI
environment. The programming language used in
developing Kieker is java programming language. The
source code language acceptable for input is Java, .Net and
Cobol. Kieker allows for checking the runtime nature of the
system developed in Java,.Net and Cobol [1].
3DSoftVis makes use of different technologies such as
Java, JDBC, RMI. The aim of 3DSoftVis is to provide
visualization across software as it get changed across
timelines [16].
B. General Visualization Tools
Chronos is a software visualization tool which allows
querying, exploration and discovery of historical changes in
source code. The tool is said to be better than ‘diff’ as it
does provide all historical versions. The tool provides a
zoom-able interface which allows querying both high level
views as well as low level views [4].
CVScan makes use of a version centric approach to
software visualization, representation and evolution. The
tool provides a line based approach in seeing the changes
across different versions of code. The tools usage is checked
using data sets from real-world [6].
Revision Towers is a tool which makes use of log files
in visualizing version control. The two log files are viewed
in parallel. The central section shows software release
within a log file. Towers are displayed in a grid. Revision
towers finds similarities with 3DSoftVis software [7].
Code City is a language-independent tool for analyzing
large software codes. The basis of this software is the on
the premise that classes are buildings and packages are
districts. The tool is applied to large scale projects or
evaluation purposes [13].

Chronos is a tool implemented for creating history
slicing. Chronos allows for checking the entire code across
different versions which are of interest to the developer. The
experimental results show that Chronos provides better
results as compared to other techniques [8].
Umple accepts as input a generalized programming
language. Umple is itself a programming language which
allows easy integration of implementation with the design
artifacts such as UML diagrams [3].
Reprograms tool is a metric-based visualization tool.
This tool accepts as input any repository url. An instance of
such repository is Github.
Evolution metrics make use of property based
measurement in visualization of software artifacts [11].
Evolution Radar accepts as input Mozilla’s source code
as a repository. The tool allows representation of coupling
both as document and at logical level coupling [12].
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF TOOLS DEVELOPED FOR DIFFERENT LANGUAGES FOR SOFTWARE VISUALIZATION
Reference
No.
Source Code Language
Name of Tool
Developed
Research Tools
used
Work Done
Year of
Publication
1 Java,.Net, Cobol Kieker
Java Programming
Language, Web
based GUI
Provides a framework which helps to oversee and
analyze the runtime behavior of system. Kieker is
currently deployed in multiple domains of Software
Engineering. [18].
2012
2 UML Models Octobubbles Not Mentioned
Provides a multi-dimensional view interactive
environment for parallel visualization and
synchronization of software models
2018
5 C, C++, Java ClonEvol C,C++,Java
ClonEval takes information from got from software
versioning
2013
15 Matlab/Octave None Mentioned
Knowledge
Discovery Meta-
model
The authors generate KDM instances which are fed as
input for further processing and analysis. 2018
3
General purpose
programming language
for visualization
Umple
Programming
language
Umple is a language which integrates modeling and
implementation. 2016
4
Repository based
projects in any
Reprograms
Metric based
visualization model
Tool for checking the differences and similarity of
software projects. 2016
16 Not mentioned 3DSoftVis
Java, JavaScript,
webserver,VRMLJD
BC, RMI
Tool for visualizing the software’s release history as it
get changed across timelines
2000
9 Not mentioned RelVis Kiviat Graphs
The tool allows studying the summary of released history
of the source codes. This aids in visual inspection across
different commits.
2005
6 Not Mentioned CVSscan Not mentioned
Line based approach for changes across different
versions
2005
7 Not Mentioned Revision Towers Not Mentioned
Creates a visualization across different versions of
software’s
2002
8 Not Mentioned Code City
Small Talk, Eclipse
IDE
Code city is Eclipse based plugin which makes use of
small talk 2011
9 Not Mentioned Chronos Online tool
Develops a tool named chronos for showing
implementation
2012
11 Not Mentioned
Evolution
Spectrographs
Not mentioned
a visualization mechanism using property based
measurements for the components of source code 2004
12
Mozilla repository
source code
Evolution Radar Not mentioned
Allows visual representation of the given code at both
document level as well as module level logical coupling.
The coupling at various levels are shown by the tool
2006

IV. SNAPSHOT OF SOME SCA TOOLS
Figure 2. Shows the reconstruction of source code from the visualization. Kieker is a tool which enables source code visualization in a web based
environment.
Figure 3. Source code and Its corresponding UML class diagram as shown in the tool

Octobubbles allow direct mapping of source code to its
visualization representation in the form of UML diagrams.
Figure-3 shows how in Octobubbles the source code is
connected with its diagrammatic representation of UML
representation.
V. OBSERVATION FROM LITERATURE REVIEW
There were the following findings from the literature
review undertaken:
1. In a cloud-based environment, there were no specific
visualization tools developed focusing on larger project
source-files.
2. Many object-oriented programming languages such as
small talk do not have any source code visualization tool.
3. In the source code visualization’s developed, the
architecture of the system is not recovered.
4. The solution domain is only addressed in the source
code visualizations which is not merged with the problem
domain analysis.
5. The source code visualization’s developed were either
semi-automated completely automated.
The ultimate aim of any SCA tool is to develop
visualization or summarization of the given source code.
The source code must hence be passed through the
processes of model construction, analysis and pattern
recognition, pattern knowledge, result interpretation.
Model construction creates various graphs as
intermediate entities. These intermediate entities are fed for
pattern recognition, pattern knowledge, and result
interpretation.
TABLE II. GIVES THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SOFTWARE VISUALIZATION TOOLS DEVELOPED
Reference
No.
Source Code
Language
Name of Tool
Developed
Advantages of The Tool Disadvantage of The Tool
1, 18 Java,.Net, Cobol Kieker
Allows the user to monitor the run-time behavior of
distributed systems.
1, 18
2 UML Models Octobubbles
Solves the problem of program comprehension and
facilitates software navigation
2
5 C, C++, Java ClonEvol
ClonEvol provides visual representation of software across
different versions.
The scope-oriented view could
provide better representation
6 Not Mentioned CVSscan
Provides a visual tool for inspecting contributions of
developers, statement by statement.
Not Mentioned
7 Not Mentioned
Revision
Towers
Provides an interface for the user to see the current working
areas of the project, the change frequency and how work are
shared in a project.
The tool did not have any link
with the version-control systems.
8 Not Mentioned Code City
Code City facilitates reduced task completion time and
correctness of the task performed.
Code city did not perform better in
comparison to Eclipse and Excel
tools combined together.
9 Not Mentioned Chronos
The developer gets benefited as deelopers had study
reduced information to get to results. The accuracy of the
developers results also increased for software maintenance.
None Mentioned
3
General purpose
for visualization
Umple
1. The tool is more useful to developers due to its textual
coding ability
Umple is restricted to English
natural language
4
Repository based
projects in any
Reprograms
Tool provides user with interface to filter out software
projects and make more rational decisions for evaluations. None Mentioned
16 Not mentioned 3DSoftVis
Tool for visual representation of release history of the
project.
None mentioned
9 Not mentioned RelVis
Tool provides visualization of of graphical representation of
source code extending up to n releases.
3D Kivit diagrams are not drawn
and are part of future scope.
11 Not Mentioned
Evolution
Spectrographs
The tool highlights the changes across software releases.
None Mentioned
12
Mozilla repository
source code
Evolution
Radar
Tools facilitates visual representation at document and
module level. The tool also does analysis at different level
of logical coupling between objects at varying granularity.
Integration with different web
based tools.

TABLE III. ARTIFACTS RELATED TO SOURCE-CODE OF A PROJECT
Sr.
No.
Type of Document
Artifact of
SDLC Phase
Usage
Usage In SCA
Analysis
1 Dynamic Link Library (DLL) Coding Use in proving function calls Yes
2
Software Requirement
Specification (SRS)
Analysis Useful in providing requirement as official document between clients Yes
3
Software Design Specification
(SDS)
Design Useful in providing Design level specification of the software being
developed
Yes
4 Log Files General Create log of any activity Yes*
5 User Manual Deployment Helps in user’s day-to-day usage of software being developed No
6 Meeting Records General For creating proof of points discussed in meeting Yes*
7 Temp files General For storing temporary information Yes*
* depends on the relation with the source code being fed as input
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE LITERATURE
REVIEW
The literature survey is full of Source Code Analysis
tools. However, the author suggests the following research
directions for creating tools that are addressing a wider
audience and phases of SDLC. Authors propose that NLP
and AI technologies (NLP and ML) can aid in better
software visualization. Source Code consists of text in-form
of the developer’s comments in the source-code files in
addition to the programming language statements.
The programming language statements can be
understood by creating a parallel lookup dictionary or be
learnt to a machine using ML/DL techniques.
The existing tools in SCA focus on mainly the source
code as an input. The developers of such tool need to adopt
a more holistic approach while developing these SCA tools.
This is because source code ultimately has not just the
programming files but also various allied files which make
up the project.
VII. CONCLUSION
This is a literature review regarding existing software
visualization tools developed in SCA. The literature review
is done on software visualization and its related fields. The
literature contains various tools for providing visualization
to the software developer and maintenance engineers. There
has been more work focused on software visualization with
more traditional languages such as C, C++, java. The
current paper also provides the future direction wrt other
software artifacts onto which similar visualization can be
conducted/ The software visualization wrt other software
tools is not available. The future work includes conducting a
Systematic Literature Review (SLR) in order to provide
more exhaustive study SCA tools.
REFERENCES
[1] Van Hoorn, André, Waller, Jan and Hasselbring, Wilhelm, “Kieker:
A Framework for Application Performance Monitoring and Dynamic
Software Analysis” [Paper] In: 3rd joint ACM/SPEC International
Conference on Performance Engineering (ICPE'12), April 22-25,
2012, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 2012.
[2] Rodi Jolak, Khan-Duy Le, Kaan Burak Sener, Michel R.V.
Chaudron, "OctoBubbles: A Multi-view Interactive Environment for
Concurrent Visualization and Synchronization of UML Models and
Code", SANER 2018, Campobasso, Italy, ERA Track, page 482-486,
978-1-5386-4969-5 , 2018 IEEE.
[3] T. C. Lethbridge, V. Abdelzad, M. H. Orabi, A. H. Orabi, and O.
Adesina. “Merging modeling and programming using Umple”. In
International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal
Methods, pages 187–197. Springer, 2016.
[4] D. Rozenberg, I. Beschastnikh, F. Kosmale, V. Poser, H. Becker, M.
Palyart, G. C. Murphy, “Comparing repositories visually with
reprograms”, in: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on
Mining Software Repositories, MSR ’16, ACM, New York, NY,
USA, 2016, pp. 109–120. doi:10.1145/2901739.2901768.
[5] A. Hanjali´c, “Clonevol: Visualizing software evolution with code
clones”, in: 2013 First IEEE Working Conference on Software
Visualization (VISSOFT), 2013, pp. 1–4.
doi:10.1109/VISSOFT.2013.6650525.
[6] L. Voinea, A. Telea, J. J. van Wijk, “CVSscan: visualization of code
evolution”, in: Proceedings of 2005 ACM Symposium on Software
Visualization (Softviz 2005), St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 2005, pp.
47–56.
[7] C. Taylor, M. Munro, “Revision towers”, in: Proceedings 1st
International Workshop on Visualizing Software for Understanding
and Analysis, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos CA, 2002, pp.
43–50.
[8] F. Servant, J. A. Jones, “History slicing: Assisting code-evolution
tasks”, in: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International
Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, FSE ’12,
ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2012, pp. 43:1–43:11.
doi:10.1145/2393596.2393646 URL
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2393596.2393646
[9] M. Pinzger, H. Gall, M. Fischer, M. Lanza, “Visualizing multiple
evolution metrics”, in: Proceedings of SoftVis 2005 (2nd ACM
Symposium on Software Visualization), St. Louis, Missouri, USA,
2005, pp. 67–75.
[10] T. Gˆırba, A. Kuhn, M. Seeberger, S. Ducasse, “How developers
drive software evolution”, in: Proceedings of International Workshop
on Principles of Software Evolution (IWPSE 2005), IEEE Computer
Society Press, 2005, pp. 113–122. doi:10.1109/IWPSE.2005.21.
URL http://scg.unibe.ch/archive/papers/Girb05cOwnershipMap.pdf
[11] J. Wu, R. Holt, A. Hassan, “Exploring software evolution using
spectrographs”, in: Proceedings of 11th Working Conference on
Reverse Engineering (WCRE 2004), IEEE Computer Society Press,
Los Alamitos CA, 2004, pp. 80–89.
[12] M. D’Ambros, M. Lanza, M. Lungu, “The evolution radar:
Integrating fine-grained and coarse-grained logical coupling
information”, in: Proceedings of MSR 2006 (3rd International
Workshop on Mining Software Repositories), 2006, pp. 26 – 32.
[13] R. Wettel, M. Lanza, R. Robbes, “Software systems as cities: a
controlled experiment”, in: Proceedings of the 33rd International
Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE ’11, ACM, New York,
NY, USA, 2011, pp. 551–560. doi:10.1145/1985793.1985868.
[14] Thiago de Lima Mariano, Glauco de Figueiredo Carneiro, Miguel
Pessoa Monteiro, Fernando Britoe Abreu and Ethan Munson, “A

Parser and a Software Visualization Environment to Support the
Comprehension of MATLAB/Octave Programs”, In Proceedings of
the 20th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems
(ICEIS 2018) - Volume 2, pages 179-186, ISBN: 978-989-758-298-
1.
[15] Radoslav Kirkov, Gennady Agre, “Source Code Analysis – An
Overview”, Cybernetics And Information Technologies, Volume 10,
No 2, Bulgarian Academy Of Sciences, 2010.
[16] Claudio Riva, "Visualizing Software Release Histories with
3DSoftVis": Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on
Software Engineering. ICSE 2000 the New Millennium,Limerick,
Ireland. DOI: 10.1145/337180.337644 ,ISBN: 1-58113-206-9.
[17] Matthias Junker, "Kumpel : Visual Exploration of File Histories",
Masters Thesis, University of Institut f¨ur Informatik und
angewandte Mathematik, 2008.
[18] Hasselbring, W., & van Hoorn, A. (2020). Kieker: A monitoring
framework for software engineering research. Software Impacts,
100019.
AUTHORS’ PROFILE
Nakul Sharma completed the B.Tech in I.T. from
Bharati Vidyapeeth, Pune. He did a Master of Engineering
in Software Engineering from Thapar University in the year
2011. He has taught several subjects at PG and UG level.
Currently he is pursuing PhD from K L University. His
research interests include text mining, natural language
processing and software engineering.
Prasanth Yalla received his B.Tech Degree from
Acharya Nagarjuna University, Guntur (Dist), India in
2001, M.Tech degree in Computer Science and Engineering
from Acharya Nagarjuna University in 2004, and received
his Ph.D. degree in CSE titled “A Generic Framework to
identify and execute functional test cases for services based
on Web Service Description Language” from Acharya
Nagarjuna University, Guntur (Dist), India in April 2013.
He was an associate professor, with Department of
Information Science and Technology in KL University,
from 2004 to 2010. Later he worked as Associate professor,
with the department of Freshman Engineering from 2011 in
KL University. Presently he is working as Professor in the
department of Computer Science & Engineering in KL
University and also Associate Dean (R&D) looking after the
faculty publications. Till now he has published 28 papers in
various international journals and 4 papers in conferences.
His research interests include Software Engineering, Web
services and SOA. He taught several subjects like
Multimedia technologies, Distributed Systems, Advanced
Software Engineering, Object Oriented Analysis and design,
C programming, Object-Oriented programming with C++,
Operating Systems , Database management systems, UML
etc. He is the Life member of CSI and received “Active
Participation- Young Member” Award on 13-12-13 from
CSI. He has applied a project to SERB very recently.

Mapping and visualization of source code a survey

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Mapping and visualization of source code a survey (20)

More from Nakul Sharma (10)

Recently uploaded (20)

Mapping and visualization of source code a survey