A framework for table driven testing of Java classes

Daley, N.; Hoffman, Daniel; Strooper, Paul

doi:10.1002/spe.452

Cited by 13 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The (i) abstract parameter (new to this paper) and (ii) sub-models [2,4,14] methods result in conflict-free input parameter models. The (iii) avoid method [2] guarantees that only conflict-free test cases are selected.…”

Section: Conflict Handling Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Managing Conflicts When Using Combination Strategies to Test Software

Grindal

Offutt

Mellin

2007

2007 Australian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC'07)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Testers often represent systems under test in input parameter models. These contain parameters with associated values. Combinations of parameter values, with one value for each parameter, are potential test cases. In most models, some values of two or more parameters cannot be combined. Testers must then detect and avoid or remove these conflicts.This paper proposes two new methods for automatically handling such conflicts and compares these with two existing methods, based on the sizes of the final conflict-free test suites. A test suite reduction method, usable with three of the four investigated methods is also included in the study, resulting in seven studied conflict handling methods.In the experiment, the number and types of conflicts, as well as the size of the input parameter model and the coverage criterion used, are varied. All in all, 3854 test suites with a total of 929, 158 test cases were generated.Two methods stand out as tractable and complementary. The best method (called the avoid methods) with respect to test suite size is to avoid selection of test cases with conflicts. However, this method cannot always be used. The second best method (called the replace method), removing conflicts from the final test suite, is completely general.

show abstract

Section: Conflict Handling Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the "sub-models" method the IPM is rewritten into several conflict-free sub-IPMs [2,4,14]. The "avoid" method avoids selecting conflicting combinations, used for example in the AETG system [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Conflicts When Using Combination Strategies to Test Software

Grindal

Offutt

Mellin

2007

2007 Australian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC'07)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ConAn instantiates threads that execute calls to methods of a concurrent component in a sequence defined by the tester. The ConAn generated test driver can be run in a similar manner to test drivers of traditional unit testing and regression testing tools [34,35].…”

Section: Tools and Techniques For Verifying Concurrent Softwarementioning

confidence: 99%

A method for verifying concurrent Java components based on an analysis of concurrency failures

Long

Strooper

Wildman

2006

Concurrency and Computation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe Java programming language supports concurrency. Concurrent programs are harder to verify than their sequential counterparts due to their inherent non-determinism and a number of specific concurrency problems, such as interference and deadlock. In previous work, we have developed the ConAn testing tool for the testing of concurrent Java components. ConAn has been found to be effective at testing a large number of components, but there are certain classes of failures that are hard to detect using ConAn. Although a variety of other verification tools and techniques have been proposed for the verification of concurrent software, they each have their strengths and weaknesses. In this paper, we propose a method for verifying concurrent Java components that includes ConAn and complements it with other static and dynamic verification tools and techniques. The proposal is based on an analysis of common concurrency problems and concurrency failures in Java components. As a starting point for determining the concurrency failures in Java components, a Petri-net model of Java concurrency is used. By systematically analysing the model, we come up with a complete classification of concurrency failures. The classification and analysis are then used to determine suitable tools and techniques for detecting each of the failures. Finally, we propose to combine these tools and techniques into a method for verifying concurrent Java components. Copyright

show abstract

“…This thread executes the Java code that appears within t when the clock reaches the time associated with the tick block in which t appears. To support the checking of values and exceptions, we have integrated ConAn with the Roast unit testing tool [4]. Arbitrary Java code, as well as Roast test templates, can appear within a thread block.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dealing with non-determinism in testing concurrent Java components

Wildman

Long

Strooper

2005

12th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC'05)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The testing of concurrent software components can be dificult due to the inherent non-determinism present in these components. For example, bf the same test case is run multiple times, it may produce different results. This non-determinism may lead to problems with determining eqected outputs. In this paper, we present and discuss several possible solutions to this problem in the context of testing concurrent Java components using the ConAn testing tool. We then present a recent extension to the tool that provides a general solution to this problem that is suficient to deal with the level of non-determinism that we have encountered in testing over 20 components with ConAn.

show abstract

A framework for table driven testing of Java classes

Cited by 13 publications

References 21 publications

Managing Conflicts When Using Combination Strategies to Test Software

Managing Conflicts When Using Combination Strategies to Test Software

A method for verifying concurrent Java components based on an analysis of concurrency failures

Dealing with non-determinism in testing concurrent Java components

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About