Thesis: methodology

diff --git a/thesis/master-thesis-erlenkr.tex b/thesis/master-thesis-erlenkr.tex
index 63c490de4b4bef6a583b618318cca31219f6f48e..d0ca41302098d12ad6456ee85531d331619fb455 100644 (file)
--- a/thesis/master-thesis-erlenkr.tex
+++ b/thesis/master-thesis-erlenkr.tex
@@ -1467,13 +1467,20 @@ pass.  The definition of how the program is supposed to operate is then captured
 by the tests.  However, this does not prove the correctness of the analysis 
 leading to the test definitions.
 
-\subsection{Case study}
-\todoin{Write}
+\subsection{Case studies}
+The case study methodology is used to show how the \ExtractAndMoveMethod 
+refactoring performs on real code, not just toy examples. The case studies are 
+used to analyze our project so we can conclude on its completeness and 
+usefulness.
 
 \subsection{Dogfooding}
-\todoin{Write}
+Dogfooding is a methodology where you use your own tools to do your job, also 
+referred to as ``eating your own dog food''\citing{harrisonDogfooding2006}. It 
+is used in this project to see if we can refactor our own refactoring code and 
+still use it to refactor other code.
 
 \section{Related work}\label{sec:relatedWork}
+Here we present some work related to automated composition of refactorings.
 
 \subsection{Refactoring safety}
 This section presents a couple of approaches to improving the safety of 
@@ -4132,9 +4139,7 @@ JDT refactoring code.
 
 For the second case, the \ExtractAndMoveMethod refactoring is fed the 
 \code{no.uio.ifi.refaktor} project. This is done as a variation of the 
-``dogfooding'' methodology, where you use your own tools to do your job, also 
-referred to as ``eating your own dog 
-food''\citing{harrisonDogfooding2006}.
+``dogfooding'' methodology.
 
 \section{The tools}
 For conducting these experiments, three software tools are used. Two of the