18756674. DYNAMIC REVIEW OF SOFTWARE UPDATES AFTER PULL REQUESTS simplified abstract (Capital One Services, LLC)

DYNAMIC REVIEW OF SOFTWARE UPDATES AFTER PULL REQUESTS

Organization Name

Capital One Services, LLC

Inventor(s)

Tallulah Kay of Los Altos CA (US)

Benjamin Simon of WASHINGTON DC (US)

Christina Kim of San Ramon CA (US)

Naveed Khan of Bowie MD (US)

Ahmad Hassan Ibrahim of Centreville VA (US)

Jean-Etienne Lavallee of Richmond VA (US)

George Swain of Arlington VA (US)

Steven Almanzar of Arlington VA (US)

Andrew Kim of Fairfax VA (US)

Dominic Leone of Ashburn VA (US)

DYNAMIC REVIEW OF SOFTWARE UPDATES AFTER PULL REQUESTS - A simplified explanation of the abstract

This abstract first appeared for US patent application 18756674 titled 'DYNAMIC REVIEW OF SOFTWARE UPDATES AFTER PULL REQUESTS

The abstract of the patent application describes a system that receives a difference file from a software repository, parses it to determine affected files and changes, applies rules from a rule dictionary, generates software review checklist items, and commits the changes based on user confirmation.

• Simplified Explanation: The system in the patent application processes difference files from a software repository to identify changes in software code, applies rules to determine affected files and changes, generates review checklist items, and commits the changes based on user confirmation.

• Key Features and Innovation:

- Parsing difference files to identify affected files and changes - Applying rules from a rule dictionary based on file identifiers and content - Generating software review checklist items - Committing changes to the software repository based on user confirmation

• Potential Applications:

- Software development and version control - Automated code review processes - Quality assurance in software development

• Problems Solved:

- Efficient identification of changes in software code - Streamlining code review processes - Ensuring accurate and consistent application of rules

• Benefits:

- Improved software development workflow - Enhanced code review accuracy - Time and resource savings in software development

• Commercial Applications:

- "Automated Code Review System for Software Development Efficiency and Accuracy" - This technology can be utilized by software development companies to streamline their code review processes, improve code quality, and enhance overall development efficiency.

• Prior Art:

- Researchers and developers can explore prior art related to automated code review systems, software version control, and rule-based software development tools.

• Frequently Updated Research:

- Stay updated on advancements in automated code review systems, software development tools, and rule-based programming methodologies to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of software development processes.

Questions about Automated Code Review Systems: 1. How does the system determine affected files and changes in the software code? - The system parses the difference file from the software repository to identify affected files and changes based on the submitted code modifications.

2. What role does the rule dictionary play in the software review process? - The rule dictionary contains rules that are applied to compare file identifiers and content, generating software review checklist items for accurate code review.

Original Abstract Submitted

In some implementations, a system may receive, from a software repository, a difference file indicating changes, to software code, that was submitted to the software repository. The system may parse the difference file to determine files, associated with the software code, affected by the changes and to determine content associated with the changes. The system may apply rules, from a rule dictionary, based on comparing identifiers, associated with the files, with identifiers included in the rules and based on comparing the content, associated with the changes, with content included in the rules. The system may generate software review checklist items based on applying the rules and output the software review checklist items for display. The system may receive, based on input from a user, confirmation of the changes and commit the changes to the software repository based on the confirmation.