Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Software testing is an investigation conducted to provide stakeholders with information about the quality of the product or service under test.[1] Software testing can also provide an objective, independent view of the software to allow the business to appreciate and understand the risks of software implementation. Test techniques include, but are not limited to, the process of executing a program or application with the intent of finding software bugs (errors or other defects). Software testing can be stated as the process of validating and verifying that a software program/application/product: 1. meets the requirements that guided its design and development; 2. works as expected; and 3. can be implemented with the same characteristics. Software testing, depending on the testing method employed, can be implemented at any time in the development process. However, most of the test effort occurs after the requirements have been defined and the coding process has been completed. As such, the methodology of the test is governed by the software development methodology adopted. Different software development models will focus the test effort at different points in the development process. Newer development models, such as Agile, often employ test driven development and place an increased portion of the testing in the hands of the developer, before it reaches a formal team of testers. In a more traditional model, most of the test execution occurs after the requirements have been defined and the coding process has been completed.
Contents
1 Overview 2 History 3 Software testing topics o 3.1 Scope o 3.2 Functional vs non-functional testing o 3.3 Defects and failures o 3.4 Finding faults early o 3.5 Compatibility o 3.6 Input combinations and preconditions o 3.7 Static vs. dynamic testing o 3.8 Software verification and validation o 3.9 The software testing team o 3.10 Software quality assurance (SQA) 4 Testing methods o 4.1 The box approach
4.1.1 White box testing 4.1.2 Black box testing 4.1.3 Grey box testing 4.1.4 Visual testing 5 Testing levels o 5.1 Test target 5.1.1 Unit testing 5.1.2 Integration testing 5.1.3 System testing 5.1.4 System integration testing o 5.2 Objectives of testing 5.2.1 Regression testing 5.2.2 Acceptance testing 5.2.3 Alpha testing 5.2.4 Beta testing 6 Non-functional testing o 6.1 Software performance testing and load testing o 6.2 Stability testing o 6.3 Usability testing o 6.4 Security testing o 6.5 Internationalization and localization o 6.6 Destructive testing 7 The testing process o 7.1 Traditional CMMI or waterfall development model o 7.2 Agile or Extreme development model o 7.3 A sample testing cycle 8 Automated testing o 8.1 Testing tools o 8.2 Measurement in software testing 9 Testing artifacts 10 Certifications 11 Controversy 12 See also 13 References 14 External links
Overview
Testing can never completely identify all the defects within software.[2] Instead, it furnishes a criticism or comparison that compares the state and behavior of the product against oracles principles or mechanisms by which someone might recognize a problem. These oracles may include (but are not limited to) specifications, contracts,[3] comparable products, past versions of the same product, inferences about intended or expected purpose, user or customer expectations, relevant standards, applicable laws, or other criteria.
Every software product has a target audience. For example, the audience for video game software is completely different from banking software. Therefore, when an organization develops or otherwise invests in a software product, it can assess whether the software product will be acceptable to its end users, its target audience, its purchasers, and other stakeholders. Software testing is the process of attempting to make this assessment. A study conducted by NIST in 2002 reports that software bugs cost the U.S. economy $59.5 billion annually. More than a third of this cost could be avoided if better software testing was performed.[4]
History
The separation of debugging from testing was initially introduced by Glenford J. Myers in 1979.[5] Although his attention was on breakage testing ("a successful test is one that finds a bug"[5][6]) it illustrated the desire of the software engineering community to separate fundamental development activities, such as debugging, from that of verification. Dave Gelperin and William C. Hetzel classified in 1988 the phases and goals in software testing in the following stages:[7]
Until 1956 - Debugging oriented[8] 19571978 - Demonstration oriented[9] 19791982 - Destruction oriented[10] 19831987 - Evaluation oriented[11] 19882000 - Prevention oriented[12]
Non-functional testing refers to aspects of the software that may not be related to a specific function or user action, such as scalability or other performance, behavior under certain constraints, or security. Non-functional requirements tend to be those that reflect the quality of the product, particularly in the context of the suitability perspective of its users.
Time introduced
Compatibility
A common cause of software failure (real or perceived) is a lack of compatibility with other application software, operating systems (or operating system versions, old or new), or target environments that differ greatly from the original (such as a terminal or GUI application intended to be run on the desktop now being required to become a web application, which must render in a web browser). For example, in the case of a lack of backward compatibility, this can occur because the programmers develop and test software only on the latest version of the target
environment, which not all users may be running. This results in the unintended consequence that the latest work may not function on earlier versions of the target environment, or on older hardware that earlier versions of the target environment was capable of using. Sometimes such issues can be fixed by proactively abstracting operating system functionality into a separate program module or library.
Verification: Have we built the software right? (i.e., does it match the specification). Validation: Have we built the right software? (i.e., is this what the customer wants).
The terms verification and validation are commonly used interchangeably in the industry; it is also common to see these two terms incorrectly defined. According to the IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology: Verification is the process of evaluating a system or component to determine whether the products of a given development phase satisfy the conditions imposed at the start of that phase. Validation is the process of evaluating a system or component during or at the end of the development process to determine whether it satisfies specified requirements.
According to the IS0 9000 standard: Verification is confirmation by examination and through provision of objective evidence that specified requirements have been fulfilled. Validation is confirmation by examination and through provision of objective evidence that the requirements for a specific intended use or application have been fulfilled.
Testing methods
The box approach
Software testing methods are traditionally divided into white- and black-box testing. These two approaches are used to describe the point of view that a test engineer takes when designing test cases. White box testing
Main article: White box testing White box testing is when the tester has access to the internal data structures and algorithms including the code that implement these. Types of white box testing The following types of white box testing exist:
API testing (application programming interface) - testing of the application using public and private APIs Code coverage - creating tests to satisfy some criteria of code coverage (e.g., the test designer can create tests to cause all statements in the program to be executed at least once) Fault injection methods - improving the coverage of a test by introducing faults to test code paths Mutation testing methods Static testing - White box testing includes all static testing
Test coverage White box testing methods can also be used to evaluate the completeness of a test suite that was created with black box testing methods. This allows the software team to examine parts of a system that are rarely tested and ensures that the most important function points have been tested.[22] Two common forms of code coverage are:
Function coverage, which reports on functions executed Statement coverage, which reports on the number of lines executed to complete the test They both return a code coverage metric, measured as a percentage. Black box testing Main article: Black box testing Black box testing treats the software as a "black box"without any knowledge of internal implementation. Black box testing methods include: equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, all-pairs testing, fuzz testing, model-based testing, exploratory testing and specification-based testing.
Specification-based testing: Specification-based testing aims to test the functionality of software according to the applicable requirements.[23] Thus, the tester inputs data into, and only sees the output from, the test object. This level of testing usually requires thorough test cases to be provided to the tester, who then can simply verify that for a
given input, the output value (or behavior), either "is" or "is not" the same as the expected value specified in the test case. Specification-based testing is necessary, but it is insufficient to guard against certain risks.[24] Advantages and disadvantages: The black box tester has no "bonds" with the code, and a tester's perception is very simple: a code must have bugs. Using the principle, "Ask and you shall receive," black box testers find bugs where programmers do not. On the other hand, black box testing has been said to be "like a walk in a dark labyrinth without a flashlight," because the tester doesn't know how the software being tested was actually constructed. As a result, there are situations when (1) a tester writes many test cases to check something that could have been tested by only one test case, and/or (2) some parts of the back-end are not tested at all. Therefore, black box testing has the advantage of "an unaffiliated opinion", on the one hand, and the disadvantage of "blind exploring", on the other. [25] Grey box testing Grey Box Testing (American spelling: gray box testing) involves having knowledge of internal data structures and algorithms for purposes of designing the test cases, but testing at the user, or black-box level. The tester is not required to have a full access to the software's source code.[26][not in citation given] Manipulating input data and formatting output do not qualify as grey box, because the input and output are clearly outside of the "black-box" that we are calling the system under test. This distinction is particularly important when conducting integration testing between two modules of code written by two different developers, where only the interfaces are exposed for test. However, modifying a data repository does qualify as grey box, as the user would not normally be able to change the data outside of the system under test. Grey box testing may also include reverse engineering to determine, for instance, boundary values or error messages. By knowing the underlying concepts of how the software works, the tester makes better-informed testing choices while testing the software from outside. Typically, a grey box tester will be permitted to set up his testing environment; for instance, seeding a database; and the tester can observe the state of the product being tested after performing certain actions. For instance, he/she may fire an SQL query on the database and then observe
the database, to ensure that the expected changes have been reflected. Grey box testings implements intelligent test scenarios, based on limited information. This will particularly apply to data type handling, exception handling, and so on.[27] Visual testing The aim of visual testing is to provide developers with the ability to examine what was happening at the point of software failure by presenting the data in such a way that the developer can easily nd the information he requires, and the information is expressed clearly.[28][29] At the core of visual testing is the idea that showing someone a problem (or a test failure), rather than just describing it, greatly increases clarity and understanding. Visual testing therefore requires the recording of the entire test process capturing everything that occurs on the test system in video format. Output videos are supplemented by real-time tester input via picture-in-apicture webcam and audio commentary from microphones. Visual testing provides a number of advantages. The quality of communication is increased dramatically because testers can show the problem (and the events leading up to it) to the developer as opposed to just describing it and the need to replicate test failures will cease to exist in many cases. The developer will have all the evidence he requires of a test failure and can instead focus on the cause of the fault and how it should be fixed. Visual testing is particularly well-suited for environments that deploy agile methods in their development of software, since agile methods require greater communication between testers and developers and collaboration within small teams.[citation needed] Ad hoc testing and exploratory testing are important methodologies for checking software integrity, because they require less preparation time to implement, whilst important bugs can be found quickly. In ad hoc testing, where testing takes place in an improvised, impromptu way, the ability of a test tool to visually record
everything that occurs on a system becomes very important.[clarification needed][citation needed] Visual testing is gathering recognition in customer acceptance and usability testing, because the test can be used by many individuals involved in the development process.[citation needed] For the customer, it becomes easy to provide detailed bug reports and feedback, and for program users, visual testing can record user actions on screen, as well as their voice and image, to provide a complete picture at the time of software failure for the developer.
Testing levels
Tests are frequently grouped by where they are added in the software development process, or by the level of specificity of the test. The main levels during the development process as defined by the SWEBOK guide are unit-, integration-, and system testing that are distinguished by the test target without implying a specific process model.[30] Other test levels are classified by the testing objective.[31]
Test target
Unit testing Main article: Unit testing Unit testing, also known as component testing, refers to tests that verify the functionality of a specific section of code, usually at the function level. In an object-oriented environment, this is usually at the class level, and the minimal unit tests include the constructors and destructors.[32] These types of tests are usually written by developers as they work on code (white-box style), to ensure that the specific function is working as expected. One function might have multiple tests, to catch corner cases or other branches in the code. Unit testing alone cannot verify the functionality of a piece of software, but rather is used to assure that the building blocks the software uses work independently of each other.
Integration testing Main article: Integration testing Integration testing is any type of software testing that seeks to verify the interfaces between components against a software design. Software components may be integrated in an iterative way or all together ("big bang"). Normally the former is considered a better practice since it allows interface issues to be localised more quickly and fixed. Integration testing works to expose defects in the interfaces and interaction between integrated components (modules). Progressively larger groups of tested software components corresponding to elements of the architectural design are integrated and tested until the software works as a system.[33] System testing Main article: System testing System testing tests a completely integrated system to verify that it meets its requirements.[34] System integration testing Main article: System integration testing System integration testing verifies that a system is integrated to any external or third-party systems defined in the system requirements.[citation needed]
Objectives of testing
Regression testing Main article: Regression testing Regression testing focuses on finding defects after a major code change has occurred. Specifically, it seeks to uncover software regressions, or old bugs that have come back. Such regressions occur whenever software functionality that was previously working correctly stops working as intended. Typically, regressions occur as an
unintended consequence of program changes, when the newly developed part of the software collides with the previously existing code. Common methods of regression testing include re-running previously run tests and checking whether previously fixed faults have reemerged. The depth of testing depends on the phase in the release process and the risk of the added features. They can either be complete, for changes added late in the release or deemed to be risky, to very shallow, consisting of positive tests on each feature, if the changes are early in the release or deemed to be of low risk. Acceptance testing Main article: Acceptance testing Acceptance testing can mean one of two things: 1. A smoke test is used as an acceptance test prior to introducing a new build to the main testing process, i.e. before integration or regression. 2. Acceptance testing performed by the customer, often in their lab environment on their own hardware, is known as user acceptance testing (UAT). Acceptance testing may be performed as part of the hand-off process between any two phases of development.[citation needed] Alpha testing Alpha testing is simulated or actual operational testing by potential users/customers or an independent test team at the developers' site. Alpha testing is often employed for off-the-shelf software as a form of internal acceptance testing, before the software goes to beta testing.[35] Beta testing Beta testing comes after alpha testing and can be considered a form of external user acceptance testing. Versions of the software, known as beta versions, are released to a limited audience outside of the programming team. The software is released to groups of people so that further testing can ensure the product has few faults or bugs. Sometimes, beta versions are made
available to the open public to increase the feedback field to a maximal number of future users.[citation needed]
Non-functional testing
Special methods exist to test non-functional aspects of software. In contrast to functional testing, which establishes the correct operation of the software (correct in that it matches the expected behavior defined in the design requirements), non-functional testing verifies that the software functions properly even when it receives invalid or unexpected inputs. Software fault injection, in the form of fuzzing, is an example of non-functional testing. Non-functional testing, especially for software, is designed to establish whether the device under test can tolerate invalid or unexpected inputs, thereby establishing the robustness of input validation routines as well as error-management routines. Various commercial non-functional testing tools are linked from the software fault injection page; there are also numerous open-source and free software tools available that perform nonfunctional testing.
Stability testing
Stability testing checks to see if the software can continuously function well in or above an acceptable period. This activity of non-functional software testing is often referred to as load (or endurance) testing.
Usability testing
Usability testing is needed to check if the user interface is easy to use and understand. It is concerned mainly with the use of the application.
Security testing
Security testing is essential for software that processes confidential data to prevent system intrusion by hackers.
Software is often localized by translating a list of strings out of context, and the translator may choose the wrong translation for an ambiguous source string. Technical terminology may become inconsistent if the project is translated by several people without proper coordination or if the translator is imprudent. Literal word-for-word translations may sound inappropriate, artificial or too technical in the target language. Untranslated messages in the original language may be left hard coded in the source code. Some messages may be created automatically at run time and the resulting string may be ungrammatical, functionally incorrect, misleading or confusing. Software may use a keyboard shortcut which has no function on the source language's keyboard layout, but is used for typing characters in the layout of the target language.
Software may lack support for the character encoding of the target language. Fonts and font sizes which are appropriate in the source language, may be inappropriate in the target language; for example, CJK characters may become unreadable if the font is too small. A string in the target language may be longer than the software can handle. This may make the string partly invisible to the user or cause the software to crash or malfunction. Software may lack proper support for reading or writing bi-directional text. Software may display images with text that wasn't localized. Localized operating systems may have differentlynamed system configuration files and environment variables and different formats for date and currency.
To avoid these and other localization problems, a tester who knows the target language must run the program with all the possible use cases for translation to see if the messages are readable, translated correctly in context and don't cause failures.
Destructive testing
Main article: Destructive testing Destructive testing attempts to cause the software or a sub-system to fail, in order to test its robustness.
Another practice is to start software testing at the same moment the project starts and it is a continuous process until the project finishes.[39] Further information: Capability Maturity Model Integration and Waterfall model
Requirements analysis: Testing should begin in the requirements phase of the software development life cycle. During the design phase, testers work with developers in determining what aspects of a design are testable and with what parameters those tests work. Test planning: Test strategy, test plan, testbed creation. Since many activities will be carried out during testing, a plan is needed.
Test development: Test procedures, test scenarios, test cases, test datasets, test scripts to use in testing software. Test execution: Testers execute the software based on the plans and test documents then report any errors found to the development team. Test reporting: Once testing is completed, testers generate metrics and make final reports on their test effort and whether or not the software tested is ready for release. Test result analysis: Or Defect Analysis, is done by the development team usually along with the client, in order to decide what defects should be assigned, fixed, rejected (i.e. found software working properly) or deferred to be dealt with later. Defect Retesting: Once a defect has been dealt with by the development team, it is retested by the testing team. AKA Resolution testing. Regression testing: It is common to have a small test program built of a subset of tests, for each integration of new, modified, or fixed software, in order to ensure that the latest delivery has not ruined anything, and that the software product as a whole is still working correctly. Test Closure: Once the test meets the exit criteria, the activities such as capturing the key outputs, lessons learned, results, logs, documents related to the project are archived and used as a reference for future projects.
Automated testing
Main article: Test automation Many programming groups are relying more and more on automated testing, especially groups that use testdriven development. There are many frameworks to write tests in, and continuous integration software will run tests automatically every time code is checked into a version control system. While automation cannot reproduce everything that a human can do (and all the ways they think of doing it), it can be very useful for regression testing. However, it does require a well-developed test suite of testing scripts in order to be truly useful.
Testing tools
Program testing and fault detection can be aided significantly by testing tools and debuggers. Testing/debug tools include features such as:
Program monitors, permitting full or partial monitoring of program code including: o Instruction set simulator, permitting complete instruction level monitoring and trace facilities o Program animation, permitting step-by-step execution and conditional breakpoint at source level or in machine code o Code coverage reports Formatted dump or symbolic debugging, tools allowing inspection of program variables on error or at chosen points Automated functional GUI testing tools are used to repeat system-level tests through the GUI Benchmarks, allowing run-time performance comparisons to be made Performance analysis (or profiling tools) that can help to highlight hot spots and resource usage
Some of these features may be incorporated into an Integrated Development Environment (IDE).
A regression testing technique is to have a standard set of tests, which cover existing functionality that result in persistent tabular data, and to compare prechange data to post-change data, where there should not be differences, using a tool like diffkit. Differences detected indicate unexpected functionality changes or "regression".
Testing artifacts
The software testing process can produce several artifacts. Test plan A test specification is called a test plan. The developers are well aware what test plans will be executed and this information is made available to management and the developers. The idea is to make them more cautious when developing their code or making additional changes. Some companies have a higher-level document called a test strategy. Traceability matrix A traceability matrix is a table that correlates requirements or design documents to test documents. It is used to change tests when related source documents are changed, to select test cases for execution when planning for regression tests by considering requirement coverage. Test case A test case normally consists of a unique identifier, requirement references from a design specification, preconditions, events, a series of steps (also known as actions) to follow, input, output, expected result, and actual result. Clinically defined a test case is an input and an expected result.[43] This can be as pragmatic as 'for condition x your derived result is y', whereas other test cases described in more detail the input scenario and what results might be expected. It can occasionally be a series of steps (but often steps are contained in a separate test procedure that can be exercised against multiple test cases, as a matter of economy) but with one expected result or expected outcome. The optional fields are a test case ID, test step, or order of execution number, related requirement(s), depth, test category, author, and check boxes for whether the test is automatable and has been automated. Larger test cases may also contain prerequisite states or steps, and descriptions. A test case should also contain a place for the actual result. These steps can be stored in a word processor document, spreadsheet, database, or other common repository. In a database system, you may also be able to see past test results, who generated the results, and what system configuration was used to generate those results. These past results would usually be stored in a separate table. Test script A test script is a procedure, or programing code that replicates user actions. Initially the term was derived from the product of work created by automated regression test tools. Test Case will be a baseline to create test scripts using a tool or a program. Test suite The most common term for a collection of test cases is a test suite. The test suite often also contains more detailed instructions or goals for each collection of test cases. It definitely contains a section where the tester identifies the system configuration used during testing. A group of test cases may also contain prerequisite states or steps, and descriptions of the following tests.
Test data In most cases, multiple sets of values or data are used to test the same functionality of a particular feature. All the test values and changeable environmental components are collected in separate files and stored as test data. It is also useful to provide this data to the client and with the product or a project. Test harness The software, tools, samples of data input and output, and configurations are all referred to collectively as a test harness.
Certifications
Several certification programs exist to support the professional aspirations of software testers and quality assurance specialists. No certification currently offered actually requires the applicant to demonstrate the ability to test software. No certification is based on a widely accepted body of knowledge. This has led some to declare that the testing field is not ready for certification.[44] Certification itself cannot measure an individual's productivity, their skill, or practical knowledge, and cannot guarantee their competence, or professionalism as a tester.[45] Software testing certification types
Exam-based: Formalized exams, which need to be passed; can also be learned by self-study [e.g., for ISTQB or QAI][46] Education-based: Instructor-led sessions, where each course has to be passed [e.g., International Institute for Software Testing (IIST)]. Testing certifications
Certified Associate in Software Testing (CAST) offered by the QAI [47] CATe offered by the International Institute for Software Testing[48]
Certified Manager in Software Testing (CMST) offered by the QAI [47] Certified Software Tester (CSTE) offered by the Quality Assurance Institute (QAI)[47] Certified Software Test Professional (CSTP) offered by the International Institute for Software Testing[48] CSTP (TM) (Australian Version) offered by K. J. Ross & Associates[49] ISEB offered by the Information Systems Examinations Board ISTQB Certified Tester, Foundation Level (CTFL) offered by the International Software Testing Qualification Board [50][51] ISTQB Certified Tester, Advanced Level (CTAL) offered by the International Software Testing Qualification Board [50][51] TMPF TMap Next Foundation offered by the Examination Institute for Information Science[52] TMPA TMap Next Advanced offered by the Examination Institute for Information Science[52] Quality assurance certifications
CMSQ offered by the Quality Assurance Institute (QAI).[47] CSQA offered by the Quality Assurance Institute (QAI)[47] CSQE offered by the American Society for Quality (ASQ)[53] CQIA offered by the American Society for Quality (ASQ)[53]
Controver sy
Some of the major software testing controversies include: What constitutes responsible software testing? Members of the "context-driven" school of testing[54] believe that there are no "best practices" of testing, but rather that testing is a set of skills that allow the tester to select or invent testing practices to suit each unique situation.[55] Agile vs. traditional Should testers learn to work under conditions of uncertainty and constant change or should they aim at process "maturity"? The agile testing movement has received growing popularity since 2006 mainly in commercial circles,[56][57] whereas government and
military[58] software providers use this methodology but also the traditional test-last models (e.g. in the Waterfall model).[citation needed] Explorat ory test vs. scripted[5
9]
Should tests be designed at the same time as they are executed or should they be designed beforehand? Man ual testin g vs. auto mate d Some writers believe that test automation is so expensive relative to its value that it should be used sparingly.[60] More in particular, test-driven development states that developers should write unit-tests of the XUnit type before coding the functionality. The tests then can be considered as a way to capture and implement the requirements. S o f t w a r e d e s i g n v s . s o f t w a r e i
m p l e m e n t a ti o n
[6 1]
Should testing be carried out only at the end or throughout the whole process? W h o w a t c h e s t h e w a t c h m e n ?
The idea is that any form of observation is also an interactionthe act of testing can also affect that which is being tested.[62]
[ e d i t ] S e e a l s o
A c c e p t a n c e t e s t i n g
A l l p a i r s t e s t i n g
A u t o m a t e d t e s t i n g
D y n a m i c p r o g r a m a n a l y s i s
F o r
m a l v e r i f i c a t i o n
G U I s o f t w a r e t e s t i n g
I n d e p e n d
e n t t e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n
M a n u a l t e s t i n g
O r t h o g o n a
l a r r a y t e s t i n g
P a i r T e s t i n g
R e v e r s e s e m a n t i c
t r a c e a b i l i t y
S o f t w a r e t e s t a b i l i t y
S t a t i c c o d e
a n a l y s i s
T e s t m a n a g e m e n t t o o l s
W e b t e s t i n g
[ e d i t ] R e f e r e n c e s
1.
E x p l o r a t o r y
T e s t i n g ,
e m
K a n e r ,
F l o r i d a
I n s t i t u t e
o f
T e c h n o l o g y ,
Q u a l i t y
A s s u r
a n c e
I n s t i t u t e
W o r l d w i d e
A n n u a l
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g
C o n f e r e
n c e ,
O r l a n d o ,
F L ,
N o v e m b e r
2 0 0 6 2.
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g
b y J i
a n t a o
P a n ,
C a r n e g i e
M e l l o n
U n i v e r s i t y 3.
L e i t n e r ,
A . ,
C i u
p a , I . ,
O r i o l ,
M . ,
M e y e r ,
B . ,
F i v a ,
A . ,
" C o n t r a c t
D r i v e n
D e v e l o p m e n t
T e s t
D r i v e n
D e v e l o p m e n t -
W r i t i n g
T e s t
C a
s e s " ,
P r o c e e d i n g s
o f
E S E C / F S E ' 0 7 :
E u r o p e a n
S o f t w a r e
E n g i
n e e r i n g
C o n f e r e n c e
a n d
t h e
A C M
S I G S O F T
S y m p o s i u m
o n
t h e
F o u n d a t i o n s
o f
S o f t w a r e
E n g i n e e r i n g
2 0 0 7 ,
( D u b r o v n i k ,
C r
o a t i a ) ,
S e p t e m b e r
2 0 0 7 4.
S o f t w a r e
e r r o r s
c o s t
U . S .
e c o n o
m y
$ 5 9 . 5
b i l l i o n
a n n u a l l y ,
N I S T
r e p o r t 5. ^
a
M y e r s ,
G l e n
f o r d J .
( 1 9 7 9 ) .
T h e
A r t
o f
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g .
J o h n
W i l e y
a n d
S o n s .
I S B N
0 4 7 1 0 4 3 2 8 1 . 6.
C o m p a n y ,
P e o p l e ' s
C o m p u t
e r
( 1 9 8 7 ) .
" D r .
D o b b ' s
j o u r n a l
o f
s o f t w a r e
t o o l s
f o r
t h e
p r o f e s s i o n a l
p r o g r a m m e r " .
D r .
D o b b ' s
j o u r n a l
o f
s o f t w a r
t o o l s
f o r
t h e
p r o f e s s i o n a l
p r o g r a m m e r
( M & T
P u b )
1 2
( 1
6 ) :
1 1 6 .
h t t p : / / b o o k s . g o o g l e . c o m / ? i d = 7 R o I A A A A I A A J . 7.
G e l
p e r i n ,
D . ;
B .
H e t z e l
( 1 9 8 8 ) .
" T h e
G r o w t h
o f
S o f t w a r e
T e s
t i n g " .
C A C M
3 1
( 6 ) .
I S S N
0 0 0 1 0 7 8 2 . 8.
u n t i l
1 9 5 6 i t
w a s
t h e
d e b u g g i n g
o r i e n t e d
p e r i o d ,
w h e n
t e s t i n g
w a s
o f t e n
a s
s o c i a t e d
t o
d e b u g g i n g :
t h e r e
w a s
n o
c l e a r
d i f f e r e n c e
b e t
w e e n
t e s t i n g
a n d
d e b u g g i n g .
G e l p e r i n ,
D . ;
B .
H e t z e l
( 1 9 8
8 ) .
" T h e
G r o w t h
o f
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g " .
C A C M
3 1
( 6 ) .
I S S N
0 0 0 1 0 7 8 2 . 9.
F r o m
1 9 5 7 1 9 7 8
t h e r e
w a s
t h e
d e m o n s t r a t i o n
o r i e n t e d
p e r i o d
w h e r e
d e b u g g i n g
a n d
t e s t i n g
w a s
d i s t i n g u
i s h e d
n o w -
i n
t h i s
p e r i o d i t
w a s
s h o w n ,
t h a t
s o f t w a r e s
a t i s f i e s
t h e
r e q u i r e m e n t s .
G e l p e r i n ,
D . ;
B .
H e t z e l
( 1 9 8 8
) .
" T h e
G r o w t h
o f
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g " .
C A C M
3 1
( 6 ) .
I S S N
0 0 1 0 7 8 2 .
10. ^
T h e
t i m e
b e t w e e n
1 9 7 9 1 9 8 2 i s
a n n o u n c e d
a s t
h e
d e s t r u c t i o n
o r i e n t e d
p e r i o d ,
w h e r e
t h e
g o a l
w a s
t o f i
n d
e r r o r s .
G e l p e r i n ,
D . ;
B .
H e t z e l
( 1 9 8 8 ) .
" T h e
G r o w t h
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g " .
C A C M
3 1
( 6 ) .
I S S N
0 0 0 1 0 7 8 2 .
11. ^
1 9 8 3
1 9 8 7 i s
c l a s s i f i e d
a s
t h e
e v a l u a t i o n
o r i e n t e d
p e r i o d : i
n t e n t i o n
h e r e i s
t h a t
d u r i n g
t h e
s o f t w a r e l i f e c y c l e
p r
o d u c t
e v a l u a t i o n i s
p r o v i d e d
a n d
m e a s u r i n g
q u a l i t y .
G e l p
e r i n ,
D . ;
B .
H e t z e l
( 1 9 8 8 ) .
" T h e
G r o w t h
o f
S o f t w a r e
T e s t
i n g " .
C A C M
3 1
( 6 ) .
I S S N
0 0 0 1 0 7 8 2 .
12. ^
F r o m
1 9 8 8
o n i t
w a s
s e e n
a s
p r e v e n t i o n
o r i e n t e d
p e r i o d
w h e r e t e s t s
w e r e
t o
d e m o n s t r a t e
t h a t
s o f t w a r e
s a t i s f i e s i t s
s p e c i f i c a t i o n , t
d e t e c t
f a u l t s
a n d
t o
p r e v e n t
f a u l t s .
G e l p e r i n ,
D . ;
B .
H e t z e l
( 1 9 8 8 ) .
" T h e
G r o w t h
o f
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g " .
C A C M
3 1
( 6 ) .
I S S N
0 0 0 1 0 7 8 2 . 13. ^
a
K a n e r ,
C e m ;
F a l k ,
J a c k
a n d
N g u y e n ,
H u n g
Q u o c
( 1 9 9 9 ) .
T e s t i n g
C o m p u t e r
S o f t w a r e ,
2 n
E d . .
N e w
Y o r k , e t a l :
J o h n
W i l e y
a n d
S o n s ,
I n c . .
p p .
8 0
p a g e s .
I S B N
0 4 7 1 3 5 8 4 6 0 .
14. ^
K o l a w a ,
A d a m ;
H u i z i n g a ,
D o r o t a
( 2 0 0 7 ) .
A u t o m a t e d
D e f e c t
P r e v e n t i o n :
B e s t
P r a c t i c
e s
i n
S o f t w a r e
M a n a g e m e n t .
W i l e y I E E E
C o m p u t e r
S o c i e t y
r e s s .
p p .
4 1 4 3 .
I S B N
0 4 7 0 0 4 2 1 2 5 .
h t t p : / / w w w . w i l e y . c o m / W
i l e y C D A / W i l e y T i t l e / p r o d u c t C d 0 4 7 0 0 4 2 1 2 5 . h t m l .
15. ^
K o l a w a ,
A d a m ;
H u i z i n g a ,
D o r o t a
( 2 0 0 7 ) .
A u t o m a t e d
D e f e c t
P r e v e n t i
o n :
B e s t
P r a c t i c e s
i n
S o f t w a r e
M a n a g e m e n t .
W i l e y I E E E
C o
m p u t e r
S o c i e t y
P r e s s .
p .
8 6 .
I S B N
0 4 7 0 0 4 2 1 2 5 .
h t t p : / / w w w
. w i l e y . c o m / W i l e y C D A / W i l e y T i t l e / p r o d u c t C d 0 4 7 0 0 4 2 1 2 5 . h t m l
. 16. ^
a
S e c t i o n
1 . 1 . 2 ,
C e r t i f i e d
T e s t e r
F o u n d a t i o n
L e v e l
S y l l a b u s ,
I n t e r n a t i o n a l
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g
Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s
B o a r d
17. ^
K a n e r ,
C e m ;
J a m e s
B a c h ,
B r e t
P e t t i c h o r d
( 2 0 0 1 ) .
L e s s o n s
L e a r n e d
i n
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g :
C o n t e x t D r i v e n
p p r o a c h .
W i l e y .
p .
4 .
I S B N
0 4 7 1 0 8 1 1 2 4 .
18. ^
M c C o n n e l l ,
t e v e
( 2 0 0 4 ) .
C o d e
C o m p l e t e
( 2 n d
e d . ) .
M i c r o s o f t
P r e s s .
p .
2 9 .
I S B N
0 7 3 5 6 1 9 6 7 0 .
19. ^
P r i n c i p l e
2 ,
S e c t i o n
1 . 3 ,
e r t i f i e d
T e s t e r
F o u n d a t i o n
L e v e l
S y l l a b u s ,
I n t e r n a t i o n a l
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g
Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s
B o a r d
20. ^
T r a n ,
E u s h i u a n
( 1 9 9 9 ) .
" V e r i f i c a t i o n / V a l i d a t i o n / C e r t i f i c a t i o n " .
I n
K o o p
m a n ,
P . .
T o p i c s
i n
D e p e n d a b l e
E m b e d d e d
S y s t e m s .
U S A :
C a r
n e g i e
M e l l o n
U n i v e r s i t y .
h t t p : / / w w w . e c e . c m u . e d u / ~ k o o p m a n
/ d e s _ s 9 9 / v e r i f i c a t i o n / i n d e x . h t m l .
R e t r i e v e d
2 0 0 8 0 1 1 3 .
21. ^ s e e
D .
G e l p e r i n
a n d
W . C .
H e t z e l
22. ^
I n t r o d u c t i o n ,
C o d e
o v e r a g e
A n a l y s i s ,
S t e v e
C o r n e t t
23. ^
L a y c o c k ,
G .
T .
( 1 9 9 3 )
( P o s t S c r i p t ) .
T h e
T h e o r y
a n d
P r a c t i c e
o f
S p e c i f i c a t i o n
a s e d
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g .
D e p t
o f
C o m p u t e r
S c i e n c e ,
S h e f f i e
l d
U n i v e r s i t y ,
U K .
h t t p : / / w w w . m c s . l e . a c . u k / p e o p l e / g t l 1 / t
h e s i s . p s . g z .
R e t r i e v e d
2 0 0 8 0 2 1 3 .
24. ^
B a c h ,
J a m e s
( J u n e
9 9 9 ) .
" R i s k
a n d
R e q u i r e m e n t s B a s e d
T e s t i n g "
( P D F ) .
C o m p u
t e r
3 2
( 6 ) :
1 1 3 1 1 4 .
h t t p : / / w w w . s a t i s f i c e . c o m / a r t i c l e s / r
e q u i r e m e n t s _ b a s e d _ t e s t i n g . p d f .
R e t r i e v e d
2 0 0 8 0 8 1 9 .
25. ^
a v e n k o v ,
R o m a n
( 2 0 0 8 ) .
H o w
t o
B e c o m e
S o f t w a r e
T e s t e r .
R o m a n
S a v e n k o v
C o n s u l t i n g .
p .
1 5 9 .
I S B N
9 7 8 0 6 1 5 2 3 3 7 2 -
7 .
26. ^
P a t t o n ,
R o n .
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g .
27. ^
" w w w . c r o s s c h e c k n e t
. c o m " .
h t t p : / / w w w . c r o s s c h e c k n e t . c o m / s o a _ t e s t i n g _ b l a c k _ w h
i t e _ g r a y _ b o x . p h p .
28. ^
V i s u a l
t e s t i n g
o f
s o f t w a r e -
H e l s i n k
U n i v e r s i t y
o f
T e c h n o l o g y
29. ^
A r t i c l e
o n
v i s u a l
t e s t i n g i
T e s t
M a g a z i n e
30. ^
h t t p : / / w w w . c o m p u t e r . o r g / p o r t a l / w e b / s w e
b o k / h t m l / c h 5 # R e f 2 . 1
31. ^
h t t p : / / w w w . c o m p u t e r . o r g / p o r t a l / w e b
/ s w e b o k / h t m l / c h 5 # R e f 2 . 2
32. ^
B i n d e r ,
R o b e r t
V .
( 1 9 9 9 ) .
T e s t
i n g
O b j e c t O r i e n t e d
S y s t e m s :
O b j e c t s ,
P a t t e r n s ,
a n d
T o o l
s .
A d d i s o n W e s l e y
P r o f e s s i o n a l .
p .
4 5 .
I S B N
0 2 0 1 8 0 9 3 8 -
9 .
33. ^
B e i z e r ,
B o r i s
( 1 9 9 0 ) .
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g
T e c h n i q u e s (
S e c o n d
e d . ) .
N e w
Y o r k :
V a n
N o s t r a n d
R e i n h o l d .
p p .
2 1 , 4 3 0
I S B N
0 4 4 2 2 0 6 7 2 0 .
34. ^
I E E E
( 1 9 9 0 ) .
I E E E
S t a n d a r d
C o m p u
t e r
D i c t i o n a r y :
C o m p i l a t i o n
o f
I E E E
S t a n d a r d
C o m p u t e r
G l o s s a r i e s .
N e w
Y o r k :
I E E E .
I S B N
1 5 5 9 3 7 0 7 9 3 .
35. ^
v a n
V e e n e
n d a a l ,
E r i k .
" S t a n d a r d
g l o s s a r y
o f
t e r m s
u s e d
i n
S o f t w a r
T e s t i n g " .
h t t p : / / w w w . a s t q b . o r g / e d u c a t i o n a l r e s o u r c e s / g
l o s s a r y . p h p # A .
R e t r i e v e d
1 7
J u n e
2 0 1 0 .
36. ^
G l o b a l i z a t i o n
t e p b y S t e p :
T h e
W o r l d R e a d y
A p p r o a c h
t o
T e s t i n g .
M i c r o s
o f t
D e v e l o p e r
N e t w o r k
37. ^
e ) T e s t i n g
P h a s e
i n
S o f t w a r e
T e s t
i n g : -
38. ^
M y e r s ,
G l e n f o r d J .
( 1 9 7 9 ) .
T h e
A r t
o f
S o f t w a r e
e s t i n g .
J o h n
W i l e y
a n d
S o n s .
p p .
1 4 5 1 4 6 .
I S B N
0 4 7 1 0 4 3
2 8 1 .
39. ^
D u s t i n ,
E l f r i e d e
( 2 0 0 2 ) .
E f f e c t i v e
S o f t w a r e
T e s t
i n g .
A d d i s o n
W e s l e y .
p .
3 .
I S B N
0 2 0 1 7 9 4 2 9 2 .
40. ^
M a r c h e n
k o ,
A r t e m
( N o v e m b e r
1 6 ,
2 0 0 7 ) .
" X P
P r a c t i c e :
C o n t i n u o u s
I n t e g r a t i o n " .
h t t p : / / a g i l e s o f t w a r e d e v e l o p m e n t . c o m / x p / p r a
c t i c e s / c o n t i n u o u s i n t e g r a t i o n .
R e t r i e v e d
2 0 0 9 1 1 1 6 .
41. ^
u r s e s ,
L e v e n t
( F e b r u a r y
1 9 ,
2 0 0 7 ) .
" A g i l e
1 0 1 :
W h a t i s
o n t i n u o u s
I n t e g r a t i o n ? " .
h t t p : / / w w w . j a c o o z i . c o m / b l o g / ? p =
1 8 .
R e t r i e v e d
2 0 0 9 1 1 1 6 .
42. ^
P a n ,
J i a n t a o
( S p r i n g
1 9 9 9 ) .
" S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g
( 1 8 8 4 9 b
D e p e n d a b l e
E m b e d d e d
S y s t e m s ) "
T o p i c s
i n
D e p e n d a b l e
E m b e d d e d
S y s t e m s .
E l e c t r i c a l
a n d
C o m p u t e r
E n g i n e e r i n g
D e p a r t m e n t ,
C a r n e g i e
M e l l o n
U n i v e r s
i t y .
h t t p : / / w w w . e c e . c m u . e d u / ~ k o o p m a n / d e s _ s 9 9 / s w _ t e s t i n g /
43. ^
I E E E
( 1 9 9 8 ) .
I E E E
s t a n d a r d
f o r
s o f t w a r e t e s t
d o c u m e n
t a t i o n .
N e w
Y o r k :
I E E E .
I S B N
0 7 3 8 1 1 4 4 3 X .
44. ^
K a n e r ,
C e m
( 2 0 0 1 ) .
" N S F
g r a n t
p r o p o s a l
t o
" l a y a
f o u n d a t i o n
f o r s i
g n i f i c a n t
i m p r o v e m e n t s
i n
t h e
q u a l i t y
o f
a c a d e m i c
a n d
c o
m m e r c i a l
c o u r s e s
i n
s o f t w a r e
t e s t i n g " "
( p d f ) .
h t t p : / / w w w
. t e s t i n g e d u c a t i o n . o r g / g e n e r a l / n s f _ g r a n t . p d f .
45. ^
K a n e r ,
C e
( 2 0 0 3 ) .
" M e a s u r i n g
t h e
E f f e c t i v e n e s s
o f
S o f t w a r e
T e s t e
r s "
( p d f ) .
h t t p : / / w w w . t e s t i n g e d u c a t i o n . o r g / a / m e s t . p d f .
46. ^
B l a c k ,
R e x
( D e c e m b e r
2 0 0 8 ) .
A d v a n c e d
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n g -
V o l .
2 :
G u i d e
t o
t h e
I S T Q B
A d v a n c e d
C e r t i f i c a t i o n
a s
a n
A d v a n c e d
T e s t
M a n a g e r .
S a n t a
B a r b a r a :
R o c k y
N o o k
P u b l i s
h e r .
I S B N
1 9 3 3 9 5 2 3 6 9 . 47. ^
a
Q u a l i t y
A s s u r a n c e
I n s t
i t u t e 48. ^
a
I n t e r n a t i o n a l
I n s t i t u t e
f o r
S o f t w a r e
T e s t i n
49. ^
K . J .
R o s s
&
A s s o c i a t e s 50. ^
a
" I S T Q B " .
h t t p : / / w w w . i s
t q b . o r g / . 51. ^
a
" I S T Q B
i n
t h e
U . S . " .
h t t p : / / w w w . a s t q b . o r
g / . 52. ^
a
E X I N :
E x a m i n a t i o n
I n s t i t u t e
f o r
I n f o r m a t i o n
S c
i e n c e 53. ^
a
A m e r i c a n
S o c i e t y
f o r
Q u a l i t y
54. ^
c o n t e x t d r i v e
n t e s t i n g . c o m
55. ^
A r t i c l e
o n
t a k i n g
a g i l e t r a i t s
w i t h o u t t
h e
a g i l e
m e t h o d .
56. ^
W e r e a l l
p a r t
o f
t h e
s t o r y
b y
D a v i
S t r o m ,
J u l y
1 ,
2 0 0 9
57. ^
I E E E a r t i c l e
a b o u t
d i f f e r e n c e s i
a d o p t i o n
o f
a g i l e
t r e n d s
b e t w e e n
e x p e r i e n c e d
m a n a g e r s
v s .
y o u n g
s t u d e n t s
o f
t h e
P r o j e c t
M a n a g e m e n t
I n s t i t u t e .
S e e
a l s o
A g i l e
a d o p t i o n
s t u d y
f r o m
2 0 0 7
58. ^
W i l l i s o n ,
J o h n
S .
( A p r i l
2 0 0 4 ) .
" A g i l e
S o f t w a r e
D e v e l o p m e n t
f o r
a n
A g i
l e
F o r c e " .
C r o s s T a l k
( S T S C )
( A p r i l
2 0 0 4 ) .
A r c h i v e d
f r o m
t h e
o r i g i n a l
o n
u n k n o w n .
h t t p : / / w e b . a r c h i v e . o r g / w e b / 2 0 0 5
1 0 2 9 1 3 5 9 2 2 / h t t p : / / w w w . s t s c . h i l l . a f . m i l / c r o s s t a l k / 2 0 0 4 / 0 4
/ 0 4 0 4 w i l l i s o n . h t m l .
59. ^
I E E E a r t i c l e
o n
E x p l o r a t o r y
v s .
N o
E x p l o r a t o r y
t e s t i n g
60. ^
A n
e x a m p l e i s
M a r k
F e w s t e r ,
D o r o
t h y
G r a h a m :
S o f t w a r e
T e s t
A u t o m a t i o n .
A d d i s o n
W e s l e y ,
1 9
9 9 ,
I S B N
0 2 0 1 3 3 1 4 0 3 .
61. ^
A r t i c l e
r e f e r r i n g
t o
o t h e r
l i n
k s
q u e s t i o n i n g
t h e
n e c e s s i t y
o f
u n i t
t e s t i n g
62. ^
M i c r o s o f t
D e v e l o p m e n t
N e t w o r k
D i s c u s s i o n
o n
e x a c t l y
t h i s
t o p i c
[ e d i t ] E x t e r n a l l i n k s
At Wikiv you ca learn m and te others about Softw testing The Depar of Sof testing
S o f t w a r e t e s t i n g t o o l s a n d p r o d u c t s a t t h e O p e
n D i r e c t o r y P r o j e c t
" S o f t w a r e t h a t m a k e s S o f t w
a r e b e t t e r " E c o n o m i s t . c o m
A u t o m a t e d s o f t w a r e t
e s t i n g m e t r i c s i n c l u d i n g m a n u a l t e s t i n g m e t r i c
Dev
R e t r i e v e d f r o m " h t t p : / / e n
. w i k i p e d i a . o r g / w / i n d e x . p h p ? t i t l e = S o f t w a r e _ t e s t
i n g & o l d i d = 4 6 1 9 3 1 8 0 4 " C a t e g o r i e s :
S o f t w a r e d e
v e l o p m e n t p r o c e s s
S o f t w a r e t e s t i n g
H i d d e n c
a t e g o r i e s :
A l l a r t i c l e s w i t h u n s o u r c e d s t a t
e m e n t s
A r t i c l e s w i t h u n s o u r c e d s t a t e m e n t s f
r o m S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 1
A r t i c l e s w i t h u n s o u r c e d
s t a t e m e n t s f r o m N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 1
A l l p a g e s n e e
d i n g c l e a n u p
W i k i p e d i a a r t i c l e s n e e d i n g c l a
r i f i c a t i o n f r o m N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 1
A r t i c l e s w i t h
u n s o u r c e d s t a t e m e n t s f r o m J a n u a r y 2 0 0 8
A r t
i c l e s w i t h u n s o u r c e d s t a t e m e n t s f r o m M a r c h
2 0 0 8
A r t i c l e s w i t h u n s o u r c e d s t a t e m e n t s f r o
m F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 1
P e r s o n a l t o o l s
L o g i n / c r e a t e
a c c o u n t
N a m e s p a c e s
A r t i c l e D i s c u s s i o n
V a r i a n t s
V i e w s
R e a d E d i t V i e w h i s t o r y
A c t i o n s S e a r c h
Special:S Search
N a v i g a t i o n
M a i n p a g e
C o n t e n t s F e a t u r e d c o n t e n t
C u r r e n t e v e n t s
R a n d o m a r t i c l e
D o n a t e t o W i k i p e
d i a
I n t e r a c t i o n
H e l p A b o u t W i k i p e d i a
C o m m u n i t y
p o r t a l
R e c e n t c h a n g e s
C o n t a c t W i k i p e d i a
T o o l b o x
W h a t l i n k s h e r e
R e l a t e d c h a n g e s
U p l o a d f i l e
S p
e c i a l p a g e s
P e r m a n e n t l i n k
C i t e t h i s p a g e
P r i n
t / e x p o r t
C r e a t e a b o o k
D o w n l o a d a s P D F
P r i n t a b l e
v e r s i o n
L a n g u a g e s
C a t a l e s k y D e u t s c h E s p a o l F r a n
a i s
B a h a s a I n d o n e s i a
I t a l i a n o
M a g y a r B a h a s a M e l a y u
N e d e r l a n d s
o r s
o m l
P o l s k i P o r t u g u s R o m n
S h q i p S l o v e n i n a S u o m i S v e n s k a
T i n g V i t
T h i s p a g e w a s l a s t m
o d i f i e d o n 2 2 N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 1 a t 1 3 : 0 0 . T e x t i s a
v a i l a b l e u n d e r t h e C r e a t i v e C o m m o n s A t t r i b u t i o
n S h a r e A l i k e L i c e n s e ; a d d i t i o n a l t e r m s m a y a p p
l y . S e e T e r m s o f u s e f o r d e t a i l s . W i k i p e d i a i
s a r e g i s t e r e d t r a d e m a r k o f t h e W i k i m e d i a F o u n
d a t i o n , I n c . , a n o n p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n . C o n t a c
t u s
P r i v a c y p o l i c y
A b o u t W i k i p e d i a
D i s c l a i m e
r s
M o b i l e v i e w