@ARTICLE{Khezemi25-IoTJ-ComparisonIoTnonIoT,
   AUTHOR       = {Nour Khezemi and Sikander Ejaz and Naouel Moha and 
      Yann-Ga�l Gu�h�neuc},
   JOURNAL      = {Internet of Things Journal (IoTJ)},
   TITLE        = {A Comparison of Code Quality Metrics and Best Practices 
      in Non-IoT and IoT Systems},
   YEAR         = {2025},
   MONTH        = {October},
   NOTE         = {28 pages.},
   OPTNUMBER    = {},
   PAGES        = {101803},
   VOLUME       = {34},
   EDITOR       = {Fatos Xhafa},
   KEYWORDS     = {Topic: <b>ESE for the IoT</b>, 
      Rubrique : <b>GL empirique pour l'IdO</b>, Journal: <b>IoTJ</b>},
   PUBLISHER    = {Elsevier},
   URL          = {http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/IoTJ25a.doc.pdf},
   ABSTRACT     = {IoT systems are a network of connected devices powered 
      by software, requiring the study of software quality for maintenance. 
      Despite extensive studies on non-IoT systems' software quality, 
      research on IoT systems' software quality is lacking. It is uncertain 
      whether non-IoT and IoT systems' software are comparable, limiting 
      the application of results and best practices from non-IoT to IoT 
      systems. Therefore, we compare the code quality of two equivalent 
      sets of non-IoT and IoT systems to determine whether there are 
      similarities and differences between the two kinds of software 
      systems. We design and apply a systematic method to select two sets 
      of 94 non-IoT and IoT system software from GitHub with comparable 
      characteristics. We compute quality metrics on the systems in these 
      two sets and then analyse and compare the metric values. We conduct 
      an in-depth analysis and provide specific examples of the IoT 
      systems' complexity and how it manifests in their source code. We 
      conclude that software for IoT systems is more complex, coupled, 
      larger, less maintainable, and cohesive than non-IoT systems. Several 
      factors, such as integrating multiple hardware and software 
      components and managing data communication between them, contribute 
      to these differences. After the comparison, we systematically select 
      and present a list of best practices to address the observed 
      differences between non-IoT and IoT code. We present a list of 
      revisited best practices with approaches, tools, or techniques for 
      developing IoT systems. For example, applying modularity and 
      refactoring are best practices for lowering complexity. Based on our 
      work, researchers can now make informed decisions using existing 
      studies on the quality of non-IoT systems for IoT systems. Developers 
      can use the list of best practices to minimise disparities in 
      complexity, size, and cohesion and enhance maintainability and code 
      readability.}
}

{"_id":"2WeiC8esw66yMrQwv","bibbaseid":"khezemi-ejaz-moha-guhneuc-acomparisonofcodequalitymetricsandbestpracticesinnoniotandiotsystems-2025","author_short":["Khezemi, N.","Ejaz, S.","Moha, N.","Gu�h�neuc, Y."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","author":[{"firstnames":["Nour"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Khezemi"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Sikander"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Ejaz"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Naouel"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Moha"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Yann-Ga�l"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Gu�h�neuc"],"suffixes":[]}],"journal":"Internet of Things Journal (IoTJ)","title":"A Comparison of Code Quality Metrics and Best Practices in Non-IoT and IoT Systems","year":"2025","month":"October","note":"28 pages.","optnumber":"","pages":"101803","volume":"34","editor":[{"firstnames":["Fatos"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Xhafa"],"suffixes":[]}],"keywords":"Topic: <b>ESE for the IoT</b>, Rubrique : <b>GL empirique pour l'IdO</b>, Journal: <b>IoTJ</b>","publisher":"Elsevier","url":"http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/IoTJ25a.doc.pdf","abstract":"IoT systems are a network of connected devices powered by software, requiring the study of software quality for maintenance. Despite extensive studies on non-IoT systems' software quality, research on IoT systems' software quality is lacking. It is uncertain whether non-IoT and IoT systems' software are comparable, limiting the application of results and best practices from non-IoT to IoT systems. Therefore, we compare the code quality of two equivalent sets of non-IoT and IoT systems to determine whether there are similarities and differences between the two kinds of software systems. We design and apply a systematic method to select two sets of 94 non-IoT and IoT system software from GitHub with comparable characteristics. We compute quality metrics on the systems in these two sets and then analyse and compare the metric values. We conduct an in-depth analysis and provide specific examples of the IoT systems' complexity and how it manifests in their source code. We conclude that software for IoT systems is more complex, coupled, larger, less maintainable, and cohesive than non-IoT systems. Several factors, such as integrating multiple hardware and software components and managing data communication between them, contribute to these differences. After the comparison, we systematically select and present a list of best practices to address the observed differences between non-IoT and IoT code. We present a list of revisited best practices with approaches, tools, or techniques for developing IoT systems. For example, applying modularity and refactoring are best practices for lowering complexity. Based on our work, researchers can now make informed decisions using existing studies on the quality of non-IoT systems for IoT systems. Developers can use the list of best practices to minimise disparities in complexity, size, and cohesion and enhance maintainability and code readability.","bibtex":"@ARTICLE{Khezemi25-IoTJ-ComparisonIoTnonIoT,\r\n AUTHOR = {Nour Khezemi and Sikander Ejaz and Naouel Moha and \r\n Yann-Ga�l Gu�h�neuc},\r\n JOURNAL = {Internet of Things Journal (IoTJ)},\r\n TITLE = {A Comparison of Code Quality Metrics and Best Practices \r\n in Non-IoT and IoT Systems},\r\n YEAR = {2025},\r\n MONTH = {October},\r\n NOTE = {28 pages.},\r\n OPTNUMBER = {},\r\n PAGES = {101803},\r\n VOLUME = {34},\r\n EDITOR = {Fatos Xhafa},\r\n KEYWORDS = {Topic: <b>ESE for the IoT</b>, \r\n Rubrique : <b>GL empirique pour l'IdO</b>, Journal: <b>IoTJ</b>},\r\n PUBLISHER = {Elsevier},\r\n URL = {http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/IoTJ25a.doc.pdf},\r\n ABSTRACT = {IoT systems are a network of connected devices powered \r\n by software, requiring the study of software quality for maintenance. \r\n Despite extensive studies on non-IoT systems' software quality, \r\n research on IoT systems' software quality is lacking. It is uncertain \r\n whether non-IoT and IoT systems' software are comparable, limiting \r\n the application of results and best practices from non-IoT to IoT \r\n systems. Therefore, we compare the code quality of two equivalent \r\n sets of non-IoT and IoT systems to determine whether there are \r\n similarities and differences between the two kinds of software \r\n systems. We design and apply a systematic method to select two sets \r\n of 94 non-IoT and IoT system software from GitHub with comparable \r\n characteristics. We compute quality metrics on the systems in these \r\n two sets and then analyse and compare the metric values. We conduct \r\n an in-depth analysis and provide specific examples of the IoT \r\n systems' complexity and how it manifests in their source code. We \r\n conclude that software for IoT systems is more complex, coupled, \r\n larger, less maintainable, and cohesive than non-IoT systems. Several \r\n factors, such as integrating multiple hardware and software \r\n components and managing data communication between them, contribute \r\n to these differences. After the comparison, we systematically select \r\n and present a list of best practices to address the observed \r\n differences between non-IoT and IoT code. We present a list of \r\n revisited best practices with approaches, tools, or techniques for \r\n developing IoT systems. For example, applying modularity and \r\n refactoring are best practices for lowering complexity. Based on our \r\n work, researchers can now make informed decisions using existing \r\n studies on the quality of non-IoT systems for IoT systems. Developers \r\n can use the list of best practices to minimise disparities in \r\n complexity, size, and cohesion and enhance maintainability and code \r\n readability.}\r\n}\r\n\r\n","author_short":["Khezemi, N.","Ejaz, S.","Moha, N.","Gu�h�neuc, Y."],"editor_short":["Xhafa, F."],"key":"Khezemi25-IoTJ-ComparisonIoTnonIoT","id":"Khezemi25-IoTJ-ComparisonIoTnonIoT","bibbaseid":"khezemi-ejaz-moha-guhneuc-acomparisonofcodequalitymetricsandbestpracticesinnoniotandiotsystems-2025","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.ptidej.net/publications/documents/IoTJ25a.doc.pdf"},"keyword":["Topic: <b>ESE for the IoT</b>","Rubrique : <b>GL empirique pour l'IdO</b>","Journal: <b>IoTJ</b>"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://www.yann-gael.gueheneuc.net/Work/Publications/Biblio/complete-bibliography.bib","dataSources":["8vn5MSGYWB4fAx9Z4"],"keywords":["topic: <b>ese for the iot</b>","rubrique : <b>gl empirique pour l'ido</b>","journal: <b>iotj</b>"],"search_terms":["comparison","code","quality","metrics","best","practices","non","iot","iot","systems","khezemi","ejaz","moha","gu�h�neuc"],"title":"A Comparison of Code Quality Metrics and Best Practices in Non-IoT and IoT Systems","year":2025}