11th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR'07) 2007
DOI: 10.1109/csmr.2007.54
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Visualizing Testsuites to Aid in Software Understanding

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
56
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
56
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Tools for assisting in the understanding of test suites have been proposed by Cornelissen et al, who present a visualization of test suites as sequence diagrams [2]. Greiler et al propose higher level visualizations, aimed at assisting developers in seeing plug-in interactions addressed by their test suites [8].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Tools for assisting in the understanding of test suites have been proposed by Cornelissen et al, who present a visualization of test suites as sequence diagrams [2]. Greiler et al propose higher level visualizations, aimed at assisting developers in seeing plug-in interactions addressed by their test suites [8].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We analyze how measuring similarity based test relations can help to (1) find relevant tests by showing test relationships, (2) understand the functionality of a test by describing high-level test cases with related unit test cases and (3) reveal blank spots in the investigated unit test suites. This paper is structured as follows: in Section 2, we discuss our test execution tracing approach.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Examples are getters and setters that are called from within a class (when called between classes, getter and setter accesses can indicate important relationships! ), and constructors and destructors of unimportant or unused objects (Cornelissen et al 2007a;Hamou-Lhadj and Lethbridge 2003). We can also filter elements of the program or its libraries, i.e., calls to specific components, classes, methods, etc.…”
Section: Trace Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…-Metric-based filtering methods can be used to determine which parts to keep and which parts to discard from a trace. Examples are: using stack depth as a metric, i.e., filtering all calls above a specific depth (Pauw et al 1998) or below a specific depth (Cornelissen et al 2007a). Hamou-Lhadj and Lethbridge put forward a utilityhood metric that indicates the probability that a specific method is a utility method, which is based on fan-in and fan-out analysis, and use a threshold value to filter parts of the trace (Hamou-Lhadj and Lethbridge 2006).…”
Section: Trace Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have conducted an experiment [5] in which we have reverse engineered and abstracted a form of UML sequence diagrams, which we call scenario diagrams. At the basis of this process lies a program's testsuite, of which the testcases are used as execution scenarios.…”
Section: Sdrmentioning
confidence: 99%