Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Review for Final – Spring 2019

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Review for Final – Spring 2019"— Presentation transcript:

1 Review for Final – Spring 2019
Jeff Offutt SWE 437 Software Testing & Maintenance

2 Parameters 10:30 – 1:15 Same room 14 May, next next Tuesday
LAST quiz retake 6-May, 1:00-3:00pm (in Engineering 4201) Closed book / closed notes / closed neighbor One sheet of definitions allowed Hand-written, not typed, double-sided is okay Comprehensive You may take breaks (not all together) Spread out Break up tables, max 2 per table 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

3 Summary: Software Maintenance
Week 2: Overview & evolution Two essays Overview of software maintenance and evolution How the web resuscitated evolutionary design Week 3: Coding and design for change Coding for change Designing for change 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

4 Summary: Part 1—Foundations
Why Test Software? (Ch 1) Fault, error, failure, program state Test maturity levels Cost of late testing Model-Driven Test Design (Ch 2) RIPR model Other terms Test Automation (Ch 3) Junit Components of a test case Developer Testing (Ch 4) Agile and TDD Criteria-Based Test Design (Ch 5) Test requirements and criteria 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

5 Cost of Late Testing 60 50 40 30 20 10 Assume $1000 unit cost, per fault, 100 faults $250K $360K Fault origin (%) Fault detection (%) Unit cost (X) $20K $100K $13K $6K 28-Oct-2010, at GTAC, added the animation to demonstrate increasing the number of faults found early, thereby decreasing the number of faults found late, and finally saving money. Lots of it! This animation is fairly complicated … must practice first!! Requirements Design Prog / Unit Test Integration Test System Test Post-Deployment Software Engineering Institute; Carnegie Mellon University; Handbook CMU/SEI-96-HB-002 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

6 Incorrect Program State
RIPR Model Reachability Infection Propagation Revealability Test Final Program State Observed Final Program State Reaches Fault Incorrect Final State Infects Incorrect Program State The failures can be revealed when the observed final program state has overlap with the incorrect final program state. The question is: should testers check the entire program state? How to observe the incorrect program state in a cost-effective manner. Getting the overlap as big as possible and use the cost as small as possible. Propagates Reveals Test Oracles 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

7 Model-Driven Test Design–Activities
refined requirements / test specs Test Design model / structure test requirements DESIGN ABSTRACTION LEVEL IMPLEMENTATION ABSTRACTION LEVEL software artifact input values Test Automation Test Evaluation pass / fail test results Test Execution test scripts test cases 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

8 Criteria Based on Structures
Structures : Four ways to model software Input Domain Characterization (sets) A: {0, 1, >1} B: {600, 700, 800} C: {swe, cs, isa, infs} Graphs Logical Expressions (not X or not Y) and A and B if (x > y) z = x - y; else z = 2 * x; Syntactic Structures (grammars) 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

9 Summary: Part 2 Coverage Criteria (1 of 4)
Input Space Partitioning – Ch 6 Input Domain Modeling (6.1) Combination Strategies Criteria (6.2) Skipped 6.3 & 6.4 – not on final exam Be sure to review the coverage definitions in 6.2 Know how to construct partitions and blocks Know how to choose values 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

10 ISP Coverage Criteria Subsumption
Each Choice Coverage ECC All Combinations Coverage ACoC T-Wise Coverage TWC Multiple Base Choice Coverage MBCC Pair-Wise Coverage PWC Base Choice Coverage BCC 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

11 Summary: Part 2 Coverage Criteria (2 of 4)
Graph Coverage – Ch 7 Overview (7.1) Graph Coverage Criteria (7.2) Graph Coverage for Source Code (7.3) Skipped 7.4, 7.5, 7.6 – not on final exam Be sure to review the definitions in 7.2 Know how to generate graphs for various artifacts and apply the criteria to them Know how to choose values (EC, EPC, PPC, …) We skipped data flow—not on the final 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

12 Graph Coverage Criteria Subsumption
Simple Round Trip Coverage SRTC Node Coverage NC Edge Coverage EC Edge-Pair Coverage EPC Prime Path Coverage PPC Complete Path Coverage CPC Complete Round Trip Coverage CRTC All-DU-Paths Coverage ADUP All-uses Coverage AUC All-defs Coverage ADC 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

13 Summary: Part 2 Coverage Criteria (3 of 4)
Logic Coverage – Ch 8 Logic Coverage Criteria (Active) (8.1) Structural Logic Coverage of Programs (8.3) Skipped 8.2, – not on final exam Be sure to review the coverage definitions in 8.1 Know how to apply the coverage criteria to programs, specs, and FSMs Know how to choose values for CACC 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

14 Logic Criteria Subsumption
Clause Coverage CC Predicate Coverage PC Combinatorial Clause Coverage COC Restricted Active Clause Coverage RACC Restricted Inactive Clause Coverage RICC General Active Clause Coverage GACC Correlated Active Clause Coverage CACC General Inactive Clause Coverage GICC 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

15 Summary: Part 2 Coverage Criteria (4 of 4)
Syntax-based Testing – Ch 9 Syntax-based Coverage Criteria (9.1) Input Space Grammars (9.5) Skipped 9.2, 9.3, 9.4 – not on final exam Understand how to derive tests from BNF 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

16 Representing Input Domains
goal domain specified domain This region is a rich source of software errors … implemented domain 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

17 Preparing & Format Re-read the text and handouts
Study the homework assignments Redo the quizzes Try exercises in text Get a good night’s sleep Possibly different kinds of questions Mostly problem solving—similar to quizzes, perhaps bigger Short answer Maybe a few T / F, M / C, single answer questions 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

18 Posting Grades I will post on Blackboard: Last assignment grades
Last quiz grades Average quiz grades Average assignment grades Participation grades Final exam score 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

19 Final Grades 15% participation, 30% quizzes, 20% assignments, 35% final exam Unbiased grading – compute and sort: >= 98 : A – Probably only one A+ per class > 93 : A > 90 : A- > 86 : B+ > 80 : B > 75 : B- > 65 : C I will “slide the line” down to an appropriate break point 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019

20 What I Want You to Take Away
You in 5 years Me Forgot everything about testing and high quality software Remember testing, but develop software the “same old way” Use these concepts to hand-design more effective tests for your software Apply automation and criteria when possible Convince your company to develop a quality mindset 437 - Final Review © Jeff Offutt, 2019


Download ppt "Review for Final – Spring 2019"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google