The high cost of locating faults in programs has motivated the development of techniques that assist in fault localization by automating part of the process of searching for faults. Empirical studies that compare these techniques have reported the relative effectiveness of four existing techniques on a set of subjects. These studies compare the rankings that the techniques compute for statements in the subject programs and the effectiveness of these rankings in locating the faults. However, it is unknown how these four techniques compare with Tarantula, another existing fault-localization technique, although this technique also provides a way to rank statements in terms of their suspiciousness. Thus, we performed a study to compare the Tarantula technique with the four techniques previously compared. This paper presents our study-it overviews the Tarantula technique along with the four other techniques studied, describes our experiment, and reports and discusses the results. Our studies show that, on the same set of subjects, the Tarantula technique consistently outperforms the other four techniques in terms of effectiveness in fault localization, and is comparable in efficiency to the least expensive of the other four techniques.

Test case prioritization techniques schedule test cases for execution in an order that attempts to increase their effectiveness at meeting some performance goal. Various goals are possible; one involves rate of fault detection -a measure of how quickly faults are detected within the testing process. An improved rate of fault detection during testing can provide faster feedback on the system under test and let software engineers begin correcting faults earlier than might otherwise be possible. One application of prioritization techniques involves regression testing -the retesting of software following modifications; in this context, prioritization techniques can take advantage of information gathered about the previous execution of test cases to obtain test case orderings. In this paper, we describe several techniques for using test execution information to prioritize test cases for regression testing, including: (1) techniques that order test cases based on their total coverage of code components; (2) techniques that order test cases based on their coverage of code components not previously covered; (3) techniques that order test cases based on their estimated ability to reveal faults in the code components that they cover. We report the results of several experiments in which we applied these techniques to various test suites for various programs and measured the rates of fault detection achieved by the prioritized test suites, comparing those rates to the rates achieved by untreated, randomly ordered, and optimally ordered suites. Analysis of the data shows that each of the prioritization techniques studied improved the rate of fault detection of test suites, and this improvement occurred even with the least expensive of those techniques. The data also shows, however, that considerable room remains for improvement. The studies highlight several cost-benefits tradeoffs among the techniques studied, as well as several opportunities for future work.

Abstract

Regression testing is an expensive but necessary maintenance activity performed on modified software to provide confidence that changes are correct and do not adversely affect other portions of the softwore. A regression test selection technique choses, from an existing test set, thests that are deemed necessary to validate modified software. We present a new technique for regression test selection. Our algorithms construct control flow graphs for a precedure or program and its modified version and use these graphs to select tests that execute changed code from the original test suite. We prove that, under certain conditions, the set of tests our technique selects includes every test from the original test suite that con expose faults in the modified procedfdure or program. Under these conditions our algorithms are safe . Moreover, although our algorithms may select some tests that cannot expose faults, they are at lease as precise as other safe regression test selection algorithms. Unlike many other regression test selection algorithms, our algorithms handle all language constructs and all types of program modifications. We have implemented our algorithms; initial empirical studies indicate that our technique can significantly reduce the cost of regression testing modified software.

Abstract-Regression testing is a necessary but expensive maintenance activity aimed at showing that code has not been adversely affected by changes. Regression test selection techniques reuse tests from an existing test suite to test a modified program. Many regression test selection techniques have been proposed; however, it is difficult to compare and evaluate these techniques because they have different goals. This paper outlines the issues relevant to regression test selection techniques, and uses these issues as the basis for a framework within which to evaluate the techniques. We illustrate the application of our framework by using it to evaluate existing regression test selection techniques. The evaluation reveals the strengths and weaknesses of existing techniques, and highlights some problems that future work in this area should address.