Review 3
Overall evaluation: | 1
Reviewer's confidence: | 4
Review
Review: | The paper presents a new tool for control and data flow navigation within an IDE, together with a preliminary evaluation which yielded some observations on the utility. In general, the aim of exploring the minimal features required to achieve certain tasks, thereby facilitating the reduction of complexity of related interfaces is clearly worthwhile. Of course, if the overall desired task set is enlarged, things will become more complicated, but this seems a sensible approach to begin to develop understanding. Regarding the evaluation, can you give more details about the data obtained, any hypothesis tested and the appropriateness of the tests applied – e.g. relating to the variance of the samples? Has the preliminary evaluation enabled a clear hypothesis to test in follow up experimentation? In related work, phrases containing “generally differ” might be made more precise. Is Flower the name of the tool or the approach or both? Overall, the short paper appears to make a small contribution to knowledge, and may stimulate some interesting conversations at the conference.
Thanks for the response, which enhances belief that the update will improve the short paper further. Am happy to recommend accept as short paper.
Review 3 Overall evaluation: | 1 Reviewer's confidence: | 4 Review Review: | The paper presents a new tool for control and data flow navigation within an IDE, together with a preliminary evaluation which yielded some observations on the utility. In general, the aim of exploring the minimal features required to achieve certain tasks, thereby facilitating the reduction of complexity of related interfaces is clearly worthwhile. Of course, if the overall desired task set is enlarged, things will become more complicated, but this seems a sensible approach to begin to develop understanding. Regarding the evaluation, can you give more details about the data obtained, any hypothesis tested and the appropriateness of the tests applied – e.g. relating to the variance of the samples? Has the preliminary evaluation enabled a clear hypothesis to test in follow up experimentation? In related work, phrases containing “generally differ” might be made more precise. Is Flower the name of the tool or the approach or both? Overall, the short paper appears to make a small contribution to knowledge, and may stimulate some interesting conversations at the conference.
Thanks for the response, which enhances belief that the update will improve the short paper further. Am happy to recommend accept as short paper.