A Tool for Automatically Generating Transcripts of Human-Computer Interaction

Hicinbothom, James H.; Zachary, Wayne

doi:10.1177/154193129303701514

Cited by 22 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Examples of some tools that may be used for such bypass testing include extensions of JUnit such as JFCUnit, Abbot, Pounder, and Jemmy Module [JUnitResources 2005]. Test cases developed using this approach are more resilient to GUI layout changes.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, currently available techniques for obtaining GUI test suites are resource intensive, requiring significant human intervention. Even though several automated approaches have been proposed [Shehady and Siewiorek 1997;; White and Almezen 2000; Kasik and George 1996], in practice, GUI test suites are still being developed manually using capture/replay tools [Hicinbothom and Zachary 1993]. Moreover, most GUIs are designed using rapid prototyping [Myers 1995;Wittel, Jr. and Lewis 1991;Rosenberg 1993], in which software is modified and tested on a continuous basis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Automatically repairing event sequence-based GUI test suites for regression testing

Memon

2008

ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although graphical user interfaces (GUIs) constitute a large part of the software being developed today and are typically created using rapid prototyping, there are no effective regression testing techniques for GUIs. The needs of GUI regression testing differ from those of traditional software. When the structure of a GUI is modified, test cases from the original GUI's suite are either reusable or unusable on the modified GUI. Because GUI test case generation is expensive, our goal is to make the unusable test cases usable, thereby helping to retain the suite's event coverage. The idea of reusing these unusable (obsolete) test cases has not been explored before. This paper shows that a large number of test cases become unusable for GUIs. It presents a new GUI regression testing technique that first automatically determines the usable and unusable test cases from a test suite after a GUI modification, then determines the unusable test cases that can be repaired so that they can execute on the modified GUI, and finally uses repairing transformations to repair the test cases. This regression testing technique along with four repairing transformations has been implemented. An empirical study for four open-source applications demonstrates that (1) this approach is effective in that many of the test cases can be repaired, and is practical in terms of its time performance, (2) certain types of test cases are more prone to becoming unusable, and (3) certain types of "dominator" events, when modified, make a large number of test cases unusable.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatically repairing event sequence-based GUI test suites for regression testing

Memon

2008

ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Examples of some tools include extensions of JUnit such as JFCUnit, Abbot, Pounder, and Jemmy Module [2] to create unit tests for GUIs. Other tools include capture/replay tools that "capture" a user session as a test case that can be later "replayed" automatically during regression testing [25]. These tools facilitate only the execution of test cases; creating and maintaining test cases is very resource-intensive.…”

Section: Existing Approaches and Their Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing cost-effective model-based techniques for GUI testing

Xie

2006

Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of today's software users interact with the software through a graphical user interface (GUI), which constitutes as much as 45-60% of the total code. The correctness of the GUI is necessary to ensure the correctness of the overall software. Although GUIs have become ubiquitous, testing GUIs for functional correctness has remained a neglected research area. Existing GUI testing techniques are extremely resource intensive primarily because GUIs have very large input spaces and evolve frequently. This dissertation overcomes the limitations of existing techniques by developing a process with supporting models, techniques, and tools for continuous integration testing of evolving GUI-based applications. The key idea of this process is to create three concentric testing loops, each with specific GUI testing goals, resource usage, and targeted feedback. has not given me time. It has been a pleasure to work with and learn from such an extraordinary individual. This experience will benefit me forever.

show abstract

“…Test engineers manually write test scripts that interact with GUI widgets or use a record-andreplay testing tool [43]. These scripts or recordings are very fragile, and several researchers have proposed techniques for maintaining GUI tests [44], [45].…”

Section: Maintaining Gui Test Scriptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

ReAssert: Suggesting Repairs for Broken Unit Tests

Daniel

Jagannath

Dig

et al. 2009

2009 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Developers often change software in ways that cause tests to fail. When this occurs, developers must determine whether failures are caused by errors in the code under test or in the test code itself. In the latter case, developers must repair failing tests or remove them from the test suite. Reparing tests is time consuming but beneficial, since removing tests reduces a test suite's ability to detect regressions. Fortunately, simple program transformations can repair many failing tests automatically.We present ReAssert, a novel technique and tool that suggests repairs to failing tests' code which cause the tests to pass. Examples include replacing literal values in tests, changing assertion methods, or replacing one assertion with several. If the developer chooses to apply the repairs, ReAssert modifies the code automatically. Our experiments show that ReAssert can repair many common test failures and that its suggested repairs correspond to developers' expectations.

show abstract

A Tool for Automatically Generating Transcripts of Human-Computer Interaction

Cited by 22 publications

References 4 publications

Automatically repairing event sequence-based GUI test suites for regression testing

Automatically repairing event sequence-based GUI test suites for regression testing

Developing cost-effective model-based techniques for GUI testing

ReAssert: Suggesting Repairs for Broken Unit Tests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About