Document Open Access Logo

A Comparison of Three Program Query Languages to Detect Python Programming Misconceptions

Authors Quentin Colla, Kim Mens , Julien Liénard

PDF HTML 5

Files

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
OASIcs.Programming.2025.21.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.69 MB
  • 15 pages
HTML5 Logo HTML (experimental)
OASIcs.Programming.2025.21.html

Document Identifiers

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Software and its engineering → Software verification
  • Software and its engineering → Automated static analysis
  • Software and its engineering → Specialized application languages
  • Software and its engineering → Software maintenance tools
  • Information systems → Query languages
  • Social and professional topics → CS1
  • General and reference → Evaluation
Keywords
  • Static Program Analysis
  • Program Query Language
  • Python Programming
  • Programming Misconceptions

Metrics

Abstract

Detecting and addressing common misconceptions in beginner programmers' code is key to improve their learning experience. This paper evaluates the effectiveness of three static program query languages and tools: Flake8, Regex and CodeQL, for identifying such misconceptions in Python code. We implemented a set of 20 common misconceptions using each language and compared them on a variety of criteria, including accuracy, performance, expressiveness, learning curve and query readability. Our analysis highlights strengths and limitations of each approach, providing insights into the most effective method for detecting programming misconceptions and enhancing feedback quality for learners.

Cite As Get BibTex

Quentin Colla, Kim Mens, and Julien Liénard. A Comparison of Three Program Query Languages to Detect Python Programming Misconceptions. In Companion Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on the Art, Science, and Engineering of Programming (Programming 2025). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 134, pp. 21:1-21:15, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025) https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.Programming.2025.21

Author Details

Quentin Colla
  • EPL, UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Kim Mens
  • ICTEAM/INGI, UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Julien Liénard
  • ICTEAM/INGI, UCLouvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

References

  1. Luca Chiodini, Igor Moreno Santos, Andrea Gallidabino, Anya Tafliovich, André L. Santos, and Matthias Hauswirth. A curated inventory of programming language misconceptions. In Carsten Schulte, Brett A. Becker, Monica Divitini, and Erik Barendsen, editors, ITiCSE '21: Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V.1, Virtual Event, Germany, June 26 - July 1, 2021, ITiCSE '21, pages 380-386, New York, NY, USA, 2021. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3430665.3456343.
  2. Hristina Gulabovska and Zoltán Porkoláb. Survey on static analysis tools of Python programs. In Zoran Budimac and Bojana Koteska, editors, Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Software Quality Analysis, Monitoring, Improvement, and Applications, SQAMIA 2019, Ohrid, North Macedonia, September 22-25, 2019, volume 2508 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2019. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2508/paper-gul.pdf.
  3. Oscar Karnalim, Simon, and William J. Chivers. Work-in-progress: Code quality issues of computing undergraduates. In Ilhem Kallel, Habib M. Kammoun, and Lobna Hsairi, editors, IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON 2022, Tunis, Tunisia, March 28-31, 2022, pages 1734-1736. IEEE, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON52537.2022.9766807.
  4. Julien Liénard, Kim Mens, and Siegfried Nijssen. Pyttern: a Python-based program query language. In Gilles Perrouin, Benoît Vanderose, and Xavier Devroey, editors, Proceedings of the 23nd Belgium-Netherlands Software Evolution Workshop, Namur, Belgium, November 21-22, 2024, volume 3941 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pages 88-96. CEUR-WS.org, November 2024. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3941/BENEVOL2024_TECH_paper10.pdf.
  5. David Liu. Introducing PythonTA: A suite of code analysis and visualization tools. In Jeffrey A. Stone, Timothy T. Yuen, Libby Shoop, Samuel A. Rebelsky, and James Prather, editors, Proceedings of the 56th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2, SIGCSE TS 2025, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 26 February 2025 - 1 March 2025, page 1773. ACM, 2025. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3641555.3704767.
  6. Yasmin Mohialden, Nadia Mahmood Hussien, Esraa Baker, and Kapil Joshi. A comparative analysis of Python code-line bug-finding methods, August 2023. Google Scholar
  7. Faizan Razaque. Code analysis and data collection using python static analysis tools and sqlite. Google Scholar
  8. Juha Sorva. Visual program simulation in introductory programming education ; Visuaalinen ohjelmasimulaatio ohjelmoinnin alkeisopetuksessa. PhD thesis, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland, May 2012. URL: https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/3534.
  9. Alaaeddin Swidan, Felienne Hermans, and Marileen Smit. Programming misconceptions for school students. In Lauri Malmi, Ari Korhonen, Robert McCartney, and Andrew Petersen, editors, Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, ICER 2018, Espoo, Finland, August 13-15, 2018, ICER '18, pages 151-159, New York, NY, USA, 2018. ACM. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3230977.3230995.
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact