Static testing techniques

Static
Testing
1 Principles 2 Lifecycle
4 Dynamic test
techniques
3 Static testing
5 Management 6 Tools
Software Testing

Contents
 Reviews and the test process
 Types of review
 Static analysis

People techniques
 individual:
desk-checking, data-stepping, proof-reading
 group:
Reviews (informal & formal): for consensus
Walkthrough: for education
Inspection (most formal): to find faults
Static techniques do not execute codeStatic techniques do not execute code

Benefits of reviews
 Development productivity improvement
 Reduced development timescales
 Reduced testing time and cost
 Lifetime cost reductions
 Reduced fault levels
 Improved customer relations
 etc.

Reviews are cost-effective
 10 times reduction in faults reaching test,
testing cost reduced by 50% to 80%
Handbook of Walkthroughs, Inspections &
Technical Reviews - Freedman & Weinberg
 reduce faults by a factor of 10
Structured Walkthroughs - Yourdon

 25% reduction in schedules, remove 80% -
95% of faults at each stage, 28 times
reduction in maintenance cost, many others
Software Inspection - Gilb & Graham

What can be Inspected?
Anything written down
can be Inspected
 policy, strategy, business plans, marketing or
advertising material, contracts
 system requirements, feasibility studies,
acceptance test plans
 test plans, test designs, test cases, test
results

 system designs, logical & physical
 software code
 user manuals, procedures, training material

What can be reviewed?
 anything which could be Inspected
i.e. anything written down
 plans, visions, “big picture”, strategic
directions, ideas
 project progress
work completed to schedule, etc.
 “Should we develop this” marketing options

What to review / Inspect?
Tests
Tests
Tests
Tests
Requirements
Design
Code
Functions
Integration T
Unit Test
Accept. Test
System Test

Costs of reviews
 Rough guide: 5%-15% of development effort
half day a week is 10%
 Effort required for reviews
planning (by leader / moderator)
preparation / self-study checking
meeting
fixing / editing / follow-up
recording & analysis of statistics / metrics
process improvement (should!)

Contents
Reviews and the test process
Types of review
Static analysis
Static testing
1 2
4 5
3
6

Types of review of documents
Informal Review
undocumented
 widely viewed as useful and cheap (but no one can
prove it!) A helpful first step for chaotic
organisations.
Technical Review: (or peer review)
 includes peer and technical experts, no
management participation. Normally documented,
fault-finding. Can be rather subjective.

Decision-making Review:
 group discusses document and makes a decision about
the content, e.g. how something should be done, go or
no-go decision, or technical comments

Types of review of documents
Walkthrough
 author guides the group through a document and his
or her thought processes, so all understand the
same thing, consensus on changes to make
Inspection:
 formal individual and group checking, using sources
and standards, according to generic and specific
rules and checklists, using entry and exit criteria,
Leader must be trained & certified, metrics required

Reviews in general 1
 Objectives / goals
validation & verification against specifications &
standards
achieve consensus (excluding Inspection)
process improvement (ideal, included in
Inspection)

 Activities
planning
overview / kick-off meeting (Inspection)
preparation / individual checking
review meeting (not always)
follow-up (for some types)
metrics recording & analysis (Inspections and
sometimes reviews)

 Roles and responsibilities
Leader / moderator - plans the review / Inspection,
chooses participants, helps & encourages,
conducts the meeting, performs follow-up,
manages metrics
Author of the document being reviewed /
Inspected

Reviewers / Inspectors - specialised fault-finding
roles for Inspection
Managers - excluded from some types of review,
need to plan project time for review / Inspection
Others: e.g. Inspection/ review Co-ordinator

 Deliverables
Changes (edits) in review product
Change requests for source documents
(predecessor documents to product being
reviewed / Inspected)
Process improvement suggestions
 to the review / Inspection process
 to the development process which produced the product
just reviewed / Inspected
Metrics (Inspection and some types of review)

 Pitfalls (they don’t always work!)
lack of training in the technique (especially
Inspection, the most formal)
lack of or quality of documentation - what is being
reviewed / Inspected

Lack of management support - “lip service” - want
them done, but don’t allow time for them to
happen in project schedules
Failure to improve processes (gets disheartening
just getting better at finding the same thing over
again)

Inspection is different
• the document to be
reviewed is given out in
advance
• typically dozens of
pages to review
• instructions are "please
review this"
• not just product,
sources
• chunk or sample
• training, roles

• some people have time
to look through it and
make comments before
the meeting (which is
difficult to arrange)
• the meeting often lasts
for hours
 entry criteria to
meeting, may not be
worth holding
 2 max., often much
shorter

• "I don't like this"
• much discussion, some
about technical
approaches, some about
trivia
• don't really know if it was
worthwhile, but we keep
doing it
 Rule violations, objective,
not subjective
• no discussion, highly
focused, anti-trivia
 only do it if value is
proven (continually)

Inspection is more and better
 entry criteria
 training
 optimum checking rate
 prioritising the words
 standards
 process improvement
 exit criteria
 quantified estimates of
remaining major faults
per page
typical review
early Inspection
mature Inspection
effectiveness return on investment
10 - 20% unknown
30 - 40% 6 - 8 hrs / Insp hr
80 - 95% 8 - 30 hrs / Insp hr

The Inspection Process
Software
Development
Stage
.
.
Planning
Kick
off
Ind
Chk
Meet Edit
Change
Request
Process
Improvement
Entry
Next Software
Development
Stage
Exit

At first glance..
Here’s a document: review this (or Inspect it)

Reviews: time and size determine
rate
Time
Checking
Rate
Size
2 hrs?
100 pages?
50 pages per hour
Checking
Rate

Review “Thoroughness”?
ordinary “review” - finds some faults, one major, fix them,
consider the document now corrected and OK
major minor
minor

Inspection: time and rate determine size
Time
Checking
Rate
Size
2 hrs?
Optimum:
1 page*
per hour
2 pages (at optimum rate)
Size
* 1 page = 300 important words

Inspection Thoroughness
Inspection can find deep-seated faults:
• all of that type can be corrected
• but needs optimum checking rate

Inspection surprises
 Fundamental importance of Rules
democratically agreed as applying
define major issues / faults
 Slow checking rates
 Strict entry & exit criteria
 Fast logging rates
 Amount of responsibility given to author

What can static analysis do?
Remember: static techniques do
not execute
the code
 A form of automated testing
check for violations of standards
check for things which may be a fault

 Descended from compiler technology
a compiler statically analyses code, and “knows” a
lot about it, e.g. variable usage; finds syntax faults
static analysis tools extend this knowledge
can find unreachable code, undeclared variables,
parameter type mis-matches, uncalled functions &
procedures, array bound violations, etc.

Data flow analysis
 This is the study of program variables
variable defined* where a value is stored into it
variable used where the stored value is accessed
variable is undefined before it is defined or when it
goes out of scope
*defined should not be confused with declared
x = y + z
IF a > b THEN read(S)
x is defined, y and z are used
a and b are used, S is defined

Data flow analysis faults
n := 0
read (x)
n := 1
while x > y do
begin
read (y)
write( n*y)
x := x - n
end
Data flow anomaly: n is
re-defined without being used
Data flow fault: y is used
before it has been defined
(first time around the loop)

Control flow analysis
 Highlights:
nodes not accessible from start node
infinite loops
multiple entry to loops
whether code is well structured, i.e. reducible
whether code conforms to a flowchart grammar
any jumps to undefined labels
any labels not jumped to
cyclomatic complexity and other metrics

Unreachable code example
 Macro definitions
(different for different platforms the code runs on)
Buffsize: 1000
Mailboxmax: 1000
IF Buffsize < Mailboxmax THEN
Error-Exit
ENDIF

 Static Analysis finds the THEN clause
unreachable, so will flag a fault

Cyclomatic complexity
 cyclomatic complexity is a measure of the
complexity of a flow graph
(and therefore the code that the flow graph
represents)
 the more complex the flow graph, the greater
the measure
 it can most easily be calculated as:
complexity = number of decisions + 1

Which flow graph is most complex?
1
2 3 5
What is the cyclomatic complexity?

Example control flow graph
Result = 0
Right = 0
DO WHILE more Questions
IF Answer = Correct THEN
Right = Right + 1
ENDIF
END DO
Result = (Right / Questions)
IF Result > 60% THEN
Print "pass"
ELSE
Print "fail”
ENDIF
do
if r=r+1
end
init
if
res
pass
fail
end
Pseudo-code:

Other static metrics
 lines of code (LOC)
 operands & operators (Halstead’s metrics)
 fan-in & fan-out
 nesting levels
 function calls
 OO metrics: inheritance tree depth, number of
methods, coupling & cohesion

Limitations and advantages
 Limitations:
cannot distinguish "fail-safe" code from
programming faults or anomalies (often creates
overload of spurious error messages)
does not execute the code, so not related to
operating conditions
 Advantages:
can find faults difficult to "see"
gives objective quality assessment of code

Summary: Key Points
 Reviews help to find faults in development
and test documentation, and should be
applied early
 Types of review: informal, walkthrough,
technical / peer review, Inspection
 Static analysis can find faults and give
information about code without executing it

Static testing techniques

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to Static testing techniques (20)

More from Mazenetsolution (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Static testing techniques