Overview: models for testing, economics of testing; high level test planning; component testing; integration testing in the small; system testing (non-functional and functional); integration testing in the large; acceptance testing; maintenance testing. | Testing in the Lifecycle Session 2B Overview Models for testing, economics of testing High level test planning Component Testing Integration testing in the small System testing (non-functional and functional) Integration testing in the large Acceptance testing Maintenance testing Integration testing in the small more than one (tested) component communication between components what the set can perform that is not possible individually non-functional aspects if possible integration strategy: big-bang vs incremental (top-down, bottom-up, functional) done by designers, analysts, or independent testers Big-Bang Integration In theory: if we have already tested components why not just combine them all at once? Wouldn’t this save time? (based on false assumption of no faults) In practice: takes longer to locate and fix faults re-testing after fixes more extensive end result? takes more time Incremental Integration Baseline 0: tested component Baseline 1: two components Baseline 2: three components, etc. Advantages: easier fault location and fix easier recovery from disaster / problems interfaces should have been tested in component tests, but add to tested baseline Top-Down Integration Baselines: baseline 0: component a baseline 1: a + b baseline 2: a + b + c baseline 3: a + b + c + d etc. Need to call to lower level components not yet integrated Stubs: simulate missing components a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o a b c d e f g h i j Stubs Stub (Baan: dummy sessions) replaces a called component for integration testing Keep it Simple print/display name (I have been called) reply to calling module (single value) computed reply (variety of values) prompt for reply from tester search list of replies provide timing delay Pros & cons of top-down approach Advantages: critical control structure tested first and most often can demonstrate system early (show working menus) Disadvantages: needs stubs detail left until last may be difficult to "see" detailed . | Testing in the Lifecycle Session 2B Overview Models for testing, economics of testing High level test planning Component Testing Integration testing in the small System testing (non-functional and functional) Integration testing in the large Acceptance testing Maintenance testing Integration testing in the small more than one (tested) component communication between components what the set can perform that is not possible individually non-functional aspects if possible integration strategy: big-bang vs incremental (top-down, bottom-up, functional) done by designers, analysts, or independent testers Big-Bang Integration In theory: if we have already tested components why not just combine them all at once? Wouldn’t this save time? (based on false assumption of no faults) In practice: takes longer to locate and fix faults re-testing after fixes more extensive end result? takes more time Incremental Integration Baseline 0: tested component Baseline 1: two components Baseline .
