Total views : 702

Analysis of Software Testing Techniques: Theory to Practical Approach

Affiliations

  • Department of IT, Bharat Institute of Technology, Meerut – 250103, Uttar Pradesh, India
  • Department of Computer Engineering, Institute of Technology, Nirma University, Ahmedabad – 382481, Gujarat, India

Abstract


In today’s scenario software testing is crucial aspect for any software company because the cost of maintenance is much more than development in software companies. We all make mistakes, some of them are not important, but some of them are harmful for software life cycle. So we should start testing the code/software that we are going to generate from initial stage because at later stage recovery or debugging will not be possible and things cannot always go right –programmer make errors or bugs every moment of the code generation. Since we adopt that we cannot always time right and our work may have error full or bugs, hence we should check our own task every moment. However some errors or bugs come from bad presumption and unsighted fields, so we might make the same errors when we check our own work as we made when we did it. Ideally, we should get someone else to check our task because another person is more likely to smudge the faults. Keeping in mind the above discussion in this paper we provide detailed analysis of testing techniques to generate better test cases. This analysis helps the beginner researchers in this area to select the appropriate technique for testing.

Keywords

Software Trial Tools, Tools Effectiveness Automated Software Testing Tools, Test Scripts

Full Text:

 |  (PDF views: 323)

References


  • Spillner A. From V-Model to W-Model – establishing the whole test process. Proceedings Conquest 2000 – 4th Conference on Quality Engineering in Software Technology, Nurnberg; 2000. p. S.222–31.
  • Karhu K, Repo T, Smolander K. Empirical observations on software testing automation. International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation; 2009.
  • Khan ME. Different forms of software testing techniques for finding errors. International Journal of Software Engineering. 2010; 7(3).
  • Bruckhaus T, Madhavil NH, Janssen I, Henshaw J. The impact of tools on software productivity. IEEE Software; 1996 Sep. p. 29–38.
  • Price DGT, Dawood MGR. Utah software test technologies; 1994 Aug.
  • Wagner S. GUI testing and automated test generation; 2004 Jul 31.
  • Mosley DJ, Posey B A. Just enough software test automation, Prentice Hall; 2002 Jul.
  • Brajnik G. Comparing accessibility evaluation tools: A method for tool effectiveness; 2004.
  • Bilal H, Black S. A complexity measure for object oriented software.
  • Black R. Managing the testing process. Wiley Publishing Inc; 2002.
  • Brink T, Hofer E. Automatically evaluating web usability. CHI 2002 Workshop; 2002 Apr.
  • Postan RM, Sexton. Evaluating and selecting testing tools. IEEE Software; 1992 May. p. 33–42.
  • Youngbult C, Brykczynski B. An examination of selected software testing tools; 1992.
  • Gerndt M, Mohr B, Larsson J. Evaluating open performance analysis tools with the apart test suite; 2003.
  • Rowley D. ATTEST: An Automated-Test-Tool Evaluation and Selection Technology. Monash University, Clayton, Victoria: Australia; 2003.
  • Vishawjyoti, Sharma S. Study and analysis of automation testing. 2012 Dec; 3(12):36–43.
  • Dhawan S, Kumar N, Sethi D, Brajnik G. Using automatic tools in accessibility and usability assurance processes. LNCS Proceedings of 8th ERCIM UI4ALL workshop, Vienna; 2004 Jun.
  • Rational Functional Tester [Internet]. Available from: Http://en.wikipedia.org. /wiki/IBM_Rational_Functional Tester.
  • Zylberman A, Shotten A. Test language: Introduction to keyword driven testing [Internet]. 2010. Available from: http://SoftwareTestingHelp.com.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.