How to identify creative test cases which finds unique bugs and accelerates the quality product releases to the market?

455 pts.
Tags:
Functional testing
Software Break Points
Software load testing
Software Quality
Software testing
Software testing tools
100% testing is time consuming. Also we can't spend our time & effort on test cases that are finding the bugs that are already found by other test cases. So, we need to come up with only creative test cases which finds UNIQUE bugs and helps in accelerating the quality product in time to the market. Any efficient test strategies (or) test case generation tools available for the generation of creative test cases ? Thanks in advance.

Answer Wiki

Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.

I think there is no tool that can be as creative as a human. Tools do what they are designed/programmed to do, so if you want creativity, that is a position for a human, not a tool.

Regards,

-Carlosdl

Discuss This Question: 4  Replies

 
There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.
Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.
Send me notifications when members answer or reply to this question.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy
  • Sundeepm
    Well there are techniques that could help: 1. Orthogonal Array testing technique : This will definitely limit the number of test cases you need to execute and is and excellent technique. 2. Decision Coverage and Path Coverage techniques: ensures good coverage of all work flows an application can take --Sundeep
    10 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Donmillion
    I suppose it depends on what you mean by "unique bugs", Saimadhu. I think perhaps you're asking for a technique that delivers "one bug per test case, one test case per bug" (assuming the bugs are there to find). The fact is that any test case may stumble across bugs that it wasn't designed to find, but it's still possible to design test cases to look for specific bugs. Glen Myers described such an approach in his 1979 classic, The Art of Software Testing (revised edition 2004, I think). He called it, "High-Yield Testing", the idea being that well-designed testing can find a relatively high "yield" of bugs for a relatively low "investment" of test cases. Studies in white-box testing by Horgan, London, and Lyu, and in black-box testing by Bender, showed that testers lacking these techniques typically required twice as many test cases to find the same quantity of bugs as testers using the techniques. One part of "high-yield" testing is to use test techniques that address the risks present in the software. For example, use: boundary value testing to trap boundary bugs; equivalence partition testing to trap data class bugs; cause-effect graphs to trap combinatorial logic bugs; syntax testing to trap compositional rule bugs; statement testing to trap computational bugs; and so on. Another part is the concept of "basis set" testing, which originated in the 1920s with electricians trying to find a minimal set of test cases that would isolate the location of a break in a complex circuit. Beizer calls it the "scientific test technique", in which, from test case to test case, you change one factor at a time until all relevant "factors" have been tested both positively and negatively. In process-based testing, for example, you start with the shortest, simplest path from the start of the process to an exit point, then vary one decision at a time until all decision outcomes have been individually tested. This will normally produce a relatively small test set (maximum n+1 paths, where n is the number of decisions in the process) which covers all statements and decisions in the process in such a way that the failure of any test case isolates the probable location of the defect. These techniques can be applied to both black-box testing (from specifications) and white-box testing (from code). Combining the two approaches--test modelling techniques targeted at specific types of bug, and test design techniques that minimise debug time by isolating bug locations--is probably as close as we can come to "test cases which find UNIQUE bugs and help accelerate time-to-market". Regards, -- Don
    10 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Saimadhu
    Thanks Donmillion for the detailed info and references. I will go thru these references.
    455 pointsBadges:
    report
  • Shilpa Venkateshwaran
    good info... risk ranking is a way to go about seeing what areas needs to be tested
    2,500 pointsBadges:
    report

Forgot Password

No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an e-mail containing your password.

Your password has been sent to:

To follow this tag...

There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Thanks! We'll email you when relevant content is added and updated.

Following