Laws of software evolution revisited¶
Lehman, M. M. (1974). Laws of software evolution revisited. Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Lehman's law of conservation of familiarity
- is the empirical observation that the average incremental change delivered per release of an E-type software system tends to remain approximately constant over the system's operational lifetime
This sourceThe eight-law restatement, where law V (conservation of familiarity) is stated in its refined form for E-type systems.
- is the empirical observation that the average incremental change delivered per release of an E-type software system tends to remain approximately constant over the system's operational lifetime
- Lehman's law of continuing change
- Lehman's first law — the law of continuing change, introduced by Meir Lehman in 1974 and restated in the 1996 eight-law formulation — is the empirical observation that an E-type software system must be continually adapted or it progressively becomes less satisfactory to its users
SupportedVerified against the source
- Lehman's first law — the law of continuing change, introduced by Meir Lehman in 1974 and restated in the 1996 eight-law formulation — is the empirical observation that an E-type software system must be continually adapted or it progressively becomes less satisfactory to its users
- Lehman's law of continuing growth
- Lehman's sixth law — the law of continuing growth, formulated in 1991 and incorporated into the 1996 restatement
This sourceLehman's account of eight Laws of Software Evolution and the FEAST feedback-control programme behind them.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
“over a period of twenty years, to formulation of eight Laws of Software Evolution”
- Lehman's sixth law — the law of continuing growth, formulated in 1991 and incorporated into the 1996 restatement
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 2 of 3 citations: 1 supported, 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:f3adf973a124 · see in the full table