首页> 外文会议>Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops, 2009. ICSTW '09 >An Experimental Comparison of Four Unit Test Criteria: Mutation, Edge-Pair, All-Uses and Prime Path Coverage
【24h】

An Experimental Comparison of Four Unit Test Criteria: Mutation, Edge-Pair, All-Uses and Prime Path Coverage

机译:四个单元测试标准的实验比较:变异,边缘对,所有用途和主要路径覆盖率

获取原文

摘要

With recent increased expectations for quality, and the growth of agile processes and test driven development, developers are expected to do more and more effective unit testing. Yet, our knowledge of when to use the various unit level test criteria is incomplete. The paper presents results from a comparison of four unit level software testing criteria. Mutation testing, prime path coverage, edge pair coverage, and all-uses testing were compared on two bases: the number of seeded faults found and the number of tests needed to satisfy the criteria. The comparison used a collection of Java classes taken from various sources and hand-seeded faults. Tests were designed and generated mostly by hand with help from tools that compute test requirements and muJava. The findings are that mutation tests detected more faults and the other three criteria were very similar. The paper also presents a secondary measure, a cost benefit ratio, computed as the number of tests needed to detect each fault. Surprisingly, mutation required the fewest number of tests. The paper also discusses some specific faults that were not found and presents analysis for why not.
机译:随着近来对质量的期望越来越高,以及敏捷过程和测试驱动开发的增长,开发人员有望进行越来越有效的单元测试。但是,我们对何时使用各种单元级别测试标准的知识尚不完善。本文介绍了通过比较四个单元级别的软件测试标准得出的结果。在两个基础上比较了突变测试,主要路径覆盖率,边对覆盖率和所有用途测试:发现的种子故障数量和满足标准所需的测试数量。比较中使用了从各种来源和人工错误中获取的Java类的集合。测试的设计和生成主要是在计算测试需求和muJava的工具的帮助下进行的。结果发现,突变测试发现了更多的故障,其他三个标准非常相似。本文还提出了一种辅助措施,即成本收益率,该成本率被计算为检测每个故障所需的测试次数。令人惊讶的是,突变需要最少的测试次数。本文还讨论了一些未发现的特定故障,并提供了为什么没有的分析。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号