Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Feedback Presence SUM Matrikkel Rühm [5] [1] [2] [1] [1] [10] Feedback to students A64129 1. rühm 0 0 No submission found A72068 1. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 For Bug 3. Actually the variable can't be <1 and >53 at the same time. You are right the condition is useless, but not because it was checked before, but because it will always be 10 false A84120 1. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 A95491 1. rühm 4,5 1 2 1 1 Not agree with bug 3, precision actually was 9,5 not set in the code B03315 1. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B04063 1. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 9 B05120 1. rühm 3,5 1 2 1 1 8,5 5 out 7 issues have been analyzed. B15676 1. rühm 4,5 1 2 1 0 Not agree with bug 3, precision actually was 8,5 not set in the code B26193 1. rühm 4 1 2 1 1 Bug 6: did not explain why you suppose that equals() is symmetric; Bug 8: but what about 9 memory overuse? B26216 1. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B26220 1. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B26232 1. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 For Bug 3. Actually the variable can't be <1 and >53 at the same time. You are right the condition is useless, but not because it was checked before, but because it will always be 10 false B35870 1. rühm 4 1 2 1 1 Bug 6: did not explain why you suppose that equals() is symmetric; Bug 8: but what about 9 memory overuse? B35885 1. rühm 3,5 1 2 1 1 8,5 5 out 7 issues have been analyzed. B35886 1. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35889 1. rühm 3,5 0,5 2 1 1 Bug 2,4: didn't explain why, Bug 3: the question is whether method equals() remains symmetric; Bug 8: I see that you tried to investigate the problem, but didn't provide meaningful 8 explanation B35906 1. rühm 3,5 0,5 2 1 1 Bug 2,4: didn't explain why, Bug 3: the question is whether method equals() remains symmetric; Bug 8: I see that you tried to investigate the problem, but didn't provide meaningful 8 explanation B50121 1. rühm 0 0 No submission found A72070 2. rühm 4 1 2 1 0 8 Bug 4,7: unclear explanation A92617 2. rühm 4 1 1 0 1 7 1.4: Why?; 1.7: And how it will affect the app during run-time? 2. I am agree that finding all possible run-time errors is undecidable, but the question was to compare static analysis vs manual inspection, you just superficially mentioned this in your answer.
A92677 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B02203 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 9 B02833 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 9 B15167 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 9 B15327 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B15675 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B16066 2. rühm 0 0 No submission found B16147 2. rühm 4 0 2 1 1 Issue1: very superficial analysis while this issue was analyzed in instructions, issue6: here FindBugs care about precision, not about comparing objects; issue7: didn't explain what is the problem. No analysis for possible null 8 pointer deref B17657 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B25863 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B26213 2. rühm 4 0 2 1 1 Issue1: very superficial analysis while this issue was analyzed in instructions, issue6: here FindBugs care about precision, not about comparing objects; issue7: didn't explain what is the problem. No analysis for possible null 8 pointer deref B33047 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35854 2. rühm 4,5 1 2 1 1 1.6: if we checked variable before then no need 9,5 to re-check again, useless code, but won't harm B35878 2. rühm 0 0 No submission found B35893 2. rühm 4 1 2 1 1 Issue1: superficial analysis; issue6: why you think so?? How the program will behave after 9 it? B35900 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 9 B35902 2. rühm 4 1 2 1 1 Issue1: superficial analysis; issue6: why you think so?? How the program will behave after 9 it? B35937 2. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 A92657 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Very well written report. Analysis of all possible 10 defects were nicely done. B02194 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Good feedback and and other parts were correct as 10 well. Nothing else really to add. B02299 3. rühm 0 0 0 0 1 1 Did not submit homework. B02475 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 In general neat report. Would have been nice to add code examples in the report as well. All in all well 10 done. B23514 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Decent report all very clearly presented and analysed. Very well written report. Analysis of all possible B23565 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 defects were nicely done. Neat and easy to read report, well done. You mention that static code analysis finds bugs faster but generally I would say it finds possible bugs and to determine weather they are really bugs or not may B35856 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 take a lot of time.
B35857 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 done. In general neat report. Would have been nice to add code examples in the report as well. All in all well Everything was well done and explained. Code snippets of the possible defects would have been ok B35864 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 but this is a really minor thing. B35869 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 primary. B35883 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 written report. B35888 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 and commented. B35898 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 primary. Possible defects were very well commented and explained. Would have been nice to see exact parts of the code were bug occurred in a report but that is not Compariosn part kind of ends in a way that there should be something more, Other than that well Would have been nice to see exact parts of the code in report as well. Other than that all was well done Possible defects were very well commented and explained. Would have been nice to see exact parts of the code were bug occurred in a report but that is not Everything was well done and explained. Code snippets of the possible defects would have been ok B35899 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 but this is a really minor thing. B35901 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 and commented. B35913 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Would have been nice to see exact parts of the code in report as well. Other than that all was well done Compariosn part kind of ends in a way that there should be something more, Other than that well written report. B35921 3. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 Not present in lab and did not submit homework. Good feedback and and other parts were correct as B35923 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 well. Nothing else really to add. Neat and easy to read report, well done. You mention that static code analysis finds bugs faster but generally I would say it finds possible bugs and to determine weather they are really bugs or not may B35926 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 take a lot of time. B50059 3. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 I liket that you pointed out exact places in code as well in addition to explanations. Well written and 10 explained report. A92658 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Really good report everything was throughly 10 explained and analysed. B01318 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 Missed from thte lab. Very good to read and follow report, nicely done. Many did not like the code too 9 much so it is not your problem really :) B02166 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 You definitely had one of the best reports this time. I would say you had most complete answer for last points and very constructive feedback. Very well 10 done. B02195 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Neat report, nothing really to complain about. Good 10 job. B04876 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Good job guys. Nice report where everything were 10 well explained and analysed. Nothing were missing. B04892 4. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 Missed lab session and did not submit report. B04970 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 Missed from lab session. Good report. All was correct 9 and presented in nicely manner.
B05045 4. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 Missed lab session and did not submit report. B11269 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 I especially liked how you added code snippets to support your conclusions and analysis. Well written 10 and explained report. B12156 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Good report all was well written and explained. Not 10 much more to add or complain about. B15681 4. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 Missed lab session and did not submit report. B26214 4. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 Missed lab session and did not submit report. High quality report as always. Nice viewpoints and B26219 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 suggestions. Really enjoyable to read. B26244 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Good job guys. Nice report where everything were 10 well explained and analysed. Nothing were missing. B26596 4. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 Missed lab session and did not submit report. B35861 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 You definitely had one of the best reports this time. I would say you had most complete answer for last points and very constructive feedback. Very well 10 done. B35867 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Very enjoyable to read lab report again. Everything were really well explained and additional materials worked through independently, what is good to see. Do not know ways how this report could have been 10 written better :) B35881 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Really good report everything was throughly 10 explained and analysed. B35890 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Good report all was well written and explained. Not 10 much more to add or complain about. B35895 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Neat report, nothing really to complain about. Good 10 job. B35912 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 I especially liked how you added code snippets to support your conclusions and analysis. Well written 10 and explained report. B35922 4. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Very enjoyable to read lab report again. Everything were really well explained and additional materials worked through independently, what is good to see. Do not know ways how this report could have been 10 written better :) 94847 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 You have written Static code analysis uses certain patterns to find possible issues, and a lot faster than a human. The term than a human is probably not the best way to argue. Its too general term and could create 10 confusion. B06358 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Well written report. You have written Static code analysis uses certain patterns to find possible issues, and a lot faster than a human. The term than a human is probably not the best way to argue. Its too general term and could create B11289 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 confusion.
B11299 5. rühm 4,75 1 2 1 0 In (7) you stated that Most likely it was Intended., but havent given any reason why you think so? I deduct 0.25 points for this. You were absent in lab, and your answer format is different from what was explained 8,75 in Lab. B16139 5. rühm 0 0 0 0 1 1 Present in Lab. Report not found. B23513 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Well written report. B26272 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B32047 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B32088 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B33549 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35591 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35853 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 For answer 3, instead of using general terms such as soft-spot and static code analysis is good, try to use technical terms such as true positive, false positive, FindBug recommendations which would 10 create less confusion. B35858 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35860 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 9 Well written report. Were absent in lab. B35865 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 For answer 3, instead of using general terms such as soft-spot and static code analysis is good, try to use technical terms such as true positive, false positive, FindBug recommendations which would 10 create less confusion. B35871 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35872 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Well written report. B35904 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35911 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35932 5. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 A91963 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Well written report. Nice to see parts of the 10 code while explaining in report. A92663 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Well written report. B02263 6. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 Absent. Report not found. B02294 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 Well written report. Nice to see parts of the 10 code while explaining in report. B02855 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B03309 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B04877 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Well written report. B12168 6. rühm 5 1 2 0 0 Absent in lab. You did not write about the General comments and conclusions on 8 performing the lab (Feedback). B12620 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B15114 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B22121 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10
B24836 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B26200 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35800 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35896 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35914 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35929 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 B35938 6. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 99930 7. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Good report! A01171 7. rühm 4,5 1 2 1 1 9,5 Analysed only 6 bugs in task-1, everything else is fine. A51708 7. rühm 4,5 1 2 1 1 Missed to mention bug names, Everything else is 9,5 good. A73881 7. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 No submission A93846 7. rühm 5 1 2 1 1 10 Good report! A94436 7. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 No submission B15641 7. rühm 5 1 2 1 0 9 Good report! Missed to mention bug names, Everything else is B17317 7. rühm 4,5 1 2 1 0 8,5 good. B26202 7. rühm 2,5 0 1,5 1 1 6 Only few bugs analysed in task-1, and missing task2 B46611 7. rühm 0 0 0 0 0 0 No submission B50178 7. rühm 4,5 1 2 1 0 8,5 Analysed only 6 bugs in task-1, everything else is fine.