CHEATHAM, T.J. and MELLINGER, L.: `Testing object-oriented software systems', Proc. 18th ACM Computer Science Conference (CSC '90), ACM Press, New York, 1990, pp. 161 -- 165.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....the modularity and on the architecture of the software, which can be improved by object oriented analysis and design. These reasons contributed to the misperception that objectoriented software requires less testing than procedural software and their testing can be done using traditional methods [6, 4]. However, object oriented methods and languages do not guarantee fewer errors in the developed software [1, 4] It is commonly accepted that testing of object oriented software can only be done to some limited extent with traditional methods, because object oriented mechanisms, namely en ....

T. J. Cheatham and L. Mellinger. Testing object-oriented software systems. In 18th ACM Annual Computer Science Conference(Washington, DC, February 20--22), pages 161-- 165. ACM Press, 1990.

....our approach is more precise, can be applied to Java programs, handles exception handling constructs, can be applied to incomplete programs, and provides a new method for handling polymorphism. Several techniques have been developed to reduce the effort required to test subclasses (e.g. [7, 11, 13]) These techniques use information associated with a parent class in the design of test suites for derived classes. However, the techniques do not address the problem of regression testing of modified classes. Kung et al. 17, 18] and Hsia et al. 14] present a technique for selecting regression ....

T. Cheatham and L. Mellinger. Testing object-oriented software systems. In Proceedings of the

....defined in a method. 28 7 Related Work Many researchers have considered the problem of regression test selection for procedural software; Section 2 cited relevant papers. Here, previous work on regression testing of object oriented software is discussed. Fielder [13] and Cheatham and Mellinger [7], present techniques for reducing the effort required to test subclasses. Both of these techniques, however, require analysis that must be performed by hand, and neither attempts to reuse test cases associated with the parent class. Harrold, McGregor, and Fitzpatrick [17] present a technique for ....

T.J. Cheatham and L. Mellinger. Testing object-oriented software systems. In Proceedings of the 1990 Computer Science Conference, pages 161--165, 1990.

....results for Tools.h . 7 Related Work Many researchers have considered the problem of regression test selection for procedural software; Section 2 cited relevant papers. Here, we discuss previous work on regression testing of object oriented software. Fielder [12] and Cheatham and Mellinger [7], present techniques for reducing the e ort required to test subclasses. Both of these techniques, however, require analysis that must be performed by hand, and neither attempts to reuse tests associated with the parent class. Harrold, McGregor, and Fitzpatrick [17] present a technique for reusing ....

T.J. Cheatham and L. Mellinger. Testing object-oriented software systems. In Proceedings of the 1990 Computer Science Conference, pages 161-165, 1990.

....class. Smith and Robson [18] use regression analysis to determine which member functions should be tested and then perform the tests guided by how the base class was tested. Inherited routines that are not affected by the derived class are not retested. Both Fiedler [5] and Cheatham and Mellinger [2] discuss subclass testing, but neither approach tries to reuse the base class s test suite. 3 ClassBench basics We illustrate the ClassBench methodology with a simplified version of the Bag class from the Borland Container Class Library [1] 3.1 Bag class Bag provides access to a bag of ....

T.J. Cheatham and L. Mellinger. Testing object-oriented software systems. In Proc. 1990 Computer Science Conference, pages 161--165, 1990.

....Ada83 is referred to as an object based language since it does not support inheritance [CW85] but it does support encapsulation and parameterization. Object oriented programs can be used to model real world objects, and thus are considered to be easier for a programmer to understand and maintain [CM90, SR90]. In addition, encapsulation should localize modifications, making maintenance easier [CM90] Consider a common example, a graphics program. This simplified system draws, moves and rotates circles and squares. An object oriented design for this system might define an abstract base class, Shape, ....

....it does support encapsulation and parameterization. Object oriented programs can be used to model real world objects, and thus are considered to be easier for a programmer to understand and maintain [CM90, SR90] In addition, encapsulation should localize modifications, making maintenance easier [CM90]. Consider a common example, a graphics program. This simplified system draws, moves and rotates circles and squares. An object oriented design for this system might define an abstract base class, Shape, that will define the feature that are common to circles and squares (and any geometric shapes ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

T. E. Cheatham and L. Mellinger. Testing object-oriented software systems. In 1990 ACM Eighteenth Annual Computer Science Conference, pages 161--165, February 1990.

....overloading, encapsulation, aggregation, and state dependent behaviour have arisen [2] It is generally accepted, therefore, that object oriented program testing is quite different from the conventional counterpart. A number of papers on the testing of object oriented programs have been published [3 14]. Most of the papers discuss the nature of the problem and potential solutions, using approaches such as functional testing, structural testing [5, 9] and state based testing [13, 14] In particular, Frankl et al. . 4, 7, 8] propose the application of the functional approach [15, 16] or ....

....only test fundamental pairs. The testing coverage of fundamental pairs is the same as that of equivalent terms. In other words, any error revealable by equivalent terms can be revealed by some fundamental pair. For instance, in Example 1, we need only test fundamental pairs such as ( 5] 6] [3] [1] 7] 9] sorting ( 5] 6] 1] 3] 7] 9] sorting and ( 1] 3] 5] 6] 7] 9] sorting [1] 3] 5] 6] 7] 9] We need not test other equivalent pairs such as ( 6] 5] 3] 1] 9] 7] sorting [1] 3] 5] 6] 7] 9] ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

CHEATHAM, T.J. and MELLINGER, L.: `Testing object-oriented software systems', Proc. 18th ACM Computer Science Conference (CSC '90), ACM Press, New York, 1990, pp. 161 -- 165.

....Inherited routines that are not affected by the derived class Bag : public Collection f public: Bag(int) void add(int) void detach(int) int getItemsInContainer( const; int hasMember(int) const; private: g Figure 1: Bag declaration class are not retested. Both Fiedler [1989] and Cheatham and Mellinger [1990] discuss subclass testing, but neither approach tries to reuse the base class s test suite. 3 ClassBench basics We illustrate the ClassBench methodology with a simplified version of the Bag class from the Borland Container Class Library [1992] 3.1 Bag class Bag provides access to a bag of ....

Cheatham, T. and Mellinger, L. (1990), Testing object-oriented software systems, in `Proc. 1990 Computer Science Conference', pp. 161--165.

....to test subclasses whose parent classes are thoroughly tested. Part of his test design phase is an analysis of the effects of inheritance on the subclass. He suggests that only minimal testing may be required for inherited member functions whose functionality has not changed. Cheatham and Mellinger[2] also discuss the problem of subclass testing and present amore extensive analysis of the retesting required for a subclass. However,both of these subclass testing techniques require that the analysis be performed by hand, which prohibits automating the design phase of testing. ....

T.J.Cheatham and L. Mellinger,"Testing object-oriented software systems," Proceedings of the 1990 Computer Science Conference,pp. 161-165, 1990.

No context found.

CHEATHAM, T.J. and MELLINGER, L.: `Testing object-oriented software systems', Proc. 18th ACM Computer Science Conference (CSC '90), ACM Press, New York, 1990, pp. 161 -- 165.

No context found.

T. E. Cheatham and L. Mellinger. Testing object-oriented software system. In 1990 ACM Eighteenth Annual Computer Science Conference, pages 161-165, February 1990.

No context found.

Thomas J. Cheatham and Lee Mellinger. Testing object-oriented software systems. In 1990 ACM Eighteenth Annual Computer Science Conference Proceedings, pages 161-165, 1990.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC