Modern integrated development environments (IDEs) provide various automated code suggestion techniques (e.g., code completion and code generation) to help developers improve their efficiency. Such techniques may retrieve similar code snippets from the code base or leverage deep learning models to provide code suggestions. However, how to effectively enhance the code suggestions using code retrieval has not been systematically investigated. In this paper, we study and explore a retrieval-augmented framework for code suggestions. Specifically, our framework leverages different retrieval approaches and search strategies to search similar code snippets. Then the retrieved code is used to further enhance the performance of language models on code suggestions. We conduct experiments by integrating different language models into our framework and compare the results with their original models. We find that our framework noticeably improves the performance of both code completion and code generation by up to 53.8% and 130.8% in terms of BLEU-4, respectively. Our study highlights that integrating the retrieval process into code suggestions can improve the performance of code suggestions by a large margin.

Large language models (LLMs) are gaining increasing popularity in software engineering (SE) due to their unprecedented performance across various applications. These models are increasingly being utilized for a range of SE tasks, including requirements engineering and design, code analysis and generation, software maintenance, and quality assurance. As LLMs become more integral to SE, evaluating their effectiveness is crucial for understanding their potential in this field. In recent years, substantial efforts have been made to assess LLM performance in various SE tasks, resulting in the creation of several benchmarks tailored to this purpose. This paper offers a thorough review of 291 benchmarks, addressing three main aspects: what benchmarks are available , how benchmarks are constructed , and the future outlook for these benchmarks . We begin by examining SE tasks such as requirements engineering and design, coding assistant, software testing, AIOps, software maintenance, and quality management. We then analyze the benchmarks and their development processes, highlighting the limitations of existing benchmarks. Additionally, we discuss the successes and failures of LLMs in different software tasks and explore future opportunities and challenges for SE-related benchmarks. We aim to provide a comprehensive overview of benchmark research in SE and offer insights to support the creation of more effective evaluation tools.

The code review comment (CRC) is pivotal in the process of modern code review. It provides reviewers with the opportunity to identify potential bugs, offer constructive feedback, and suggest improvements. Clear and concise code review comments (CRCs) facilitate the communication between developers and are crucial to the correct understanding of the identified issues and proposed solutions. Despite the importance of CRCs’ clarity, there is still a lack of guidelines on what constitutes a good clarity and how to evaluate it. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive study on understanding and evaluating the clarity of CRCs. We first derive a set of attributes related to the clarity of CRCs, namely RIE attributes (i.e., Relevance , Informativeness , and Expression ), as well as their corresponding evaluation criteria based on our literature review and survey with practitioners. We then investigate the clarity of CRCs in open-source projects written in nine programming languages and find that a large portion (i.e., 28.8%) of the CRCs lack the clarity in at least one of the attributes. Finally, we explore the potential of automatically evaluating the clarity of CRCs by proposing ClearCRC. Experimental results show that ClearCRC with pre-trained language models is promising for effective evaluation of the clarity of CRCs, achieving a balanced accuracy up to 73.04% and a F-1 score up to 94.61%.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become widely used for Software Engineering (SE) tasks, spanning from function-level code generation to complex repository-level workflows. However, the high latency of autoregressive inference remains a significant bottleneck, hindering their deployment in interactive environments. While Speculative Decoding (SD) offers a promising technique for lossless acceleration, prior research on long-context repository-level tasks and complex agentic interactions remains limited. To bridge this gap, we present a systematic empirical study to evaluate the effectiveness of SD in SE tasks. We benchmark a representative spectrum of strategies, encompassing both model-based and model-free methods, across generation, editing, and repair scenarios. Our empirical results show that SD provides clear acceleration potential for SE tasks, but its realized benefits jointly vary with model architecture and task scenario. Specifically, model-based approaches are well-suited for code generation, whereas model-free methods are better adapted to repository-level repair and editing scenarios. We further observe that the repetitiveness of SE tasks improves the performance of model-free methods, while complex agentic workflows can introduce repetitive failure modes that skew acceleration measurements. In contrast to natural language tasks, the higher predictability of SE tasks allows for more aggressive hyperparameter settings. Our findings provide practical guidance for selecting, configuring, and evaluating SD methods in SE scenarios.