Papers › Studying Duplicate Logging Statements and Their Relationships with Code Clones
Studying Duplicate Logging Statements and Their Relationships with Code Clones
Zhenhao Li, Tse-Hsun, Chen, Jinqiu Yang, Weiyi Shang
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
In this paper, we focus on studying duplicate logging statements, which are logging statements that have the same static text message. We manually studied over 4K duplicate logging statements and their surrounding code in five large-scale open source systems. We uncovered five patterns of duplicate logging code smells. For each instance of the duplicate logging code smell, we further manually identify the potentially problematic and justifiable cases. Then, we contact developers to verify our manual study result. We integrated our manual study result and the feedback of developers into our automated static analysis tool, DLFinder, which automatically detects problematic duplicate logging code smells. We evaluated DLFinder on the five manually studied systems and three additional systems. In total, combining the results of DLFinder and our manual analysis, we reported 91 problematic duplicate logging code smell instances to developers and all of them have been fixed. We further study the relationship between duplicate logging statements, including the problematic instances of duplicate logging code smells, and code clones. We find that 83% of the duplicate logging code smell instances reside in cloned code, but 17% of them reside in micro-clones that are difficult to detect using automated clone detection tools. We also find that more than half of the duplicate logging statements reside in cloned code snippets, and a large portion of them reside in very short code blocks which may not be effectively detected by existing code clone detection tools. Our study shows that, in addition to general source code that implements the business logic, code clones may also result in bad logging practices that could increase maintenance difficulties.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections