Generating Test Cases from UML Model _Part 2_

Report as inappropriate Your report has been received
Shared by: panniuniu
Tags
Stats
views:: 1
posted:: 12/1/2011
language:: English
pages:: 35
Public Domain
Document Sample
							      Model-Driven Framework for
Context-Dependent Testing of Components


                      Abu Zafer Javed


                           Advisors:
                 Paul Anthony Strooper
                Geoffrey Norman Watson

    School of Information Technology & Electrical Engineering
             The University of Queensland, Australia
                       September 3, 2007
                                                                1
Outline

   Problem and Context

   Aims / Goals

   Work Done

   Plan and Contributions




                             2
Component-based Software Development
                                                                     Problem and
                                                                       Context

   Component
      Unit of composition with contractually specified interfaces
   Interface
   Component-based software
   Advantages
      Faster development of software application
      Lower development cost
      Reusability

                                                                          3
Context-Dependent Component Testing
                                                               Problem and
                                                                 Context

 Component Testing (CT)
      Uniform across a range of component’s uses
      May fail when use of a components is:
            Novel
            Intensive for a particular functionality

 Context-Dependent Component                           CDCT


  Testing (CDCT)
    User benefits from context
    Intensive for a particular context
    Tendency to discover context-related defects

                                                                    4
Context-Dependent Component Testing
                                            Problem and
                                              Context

   Significance of context
      ARIANE 5 Rocket

   Examples of different contexts
      Different system
                                     CDCT
      Different platform




                                                 5
Problems In Component Reuse
                                                         Problem and
                                                           Context

   Unexpected behaviour of component
      Novel context

   Lack of access to internal working of components
      Observability
      Testability

   Test adequacy criteria for component reuse
      How much testing component users should perform




                                                              6
Outline

   Problem and Context

   Aims / Goals

   Work Done

   Plan and Contributions




                             7
Aims / Goals
                                                             Aims / Goals

   Devising a Model-driven Framework for Context-
    dependent Component Testing
       To test component behaviour for new context (CDCT)
       To evaluate and extend adequacy of CDCT

   Providing a tool support for the framework

   Evaluating the framework and its tool support



                                                                  8
Outline

   Problem and Context

   Aims / Goals

   Work Done

   Plan and Contributions




                             9
Model-Driven Architecture (MDA)
                                                        Work Done
   Model-centric development
        Computation Independent Model (CIM)
        Platform Independent model (PIM)
        Platform Specific model (PSM)
   MDA technology uses model transformation
        Models and meta-models
        Transformation rules
        Model transformation tools
   Advantages
        Automation of software development
        Automation of software testing
        Reverse-engineering of software applications
                                                           10
Model-Driven Process
                                                                                                           Work Done
 Horizontal Transformation
 Vertical Transformation


                          Horizontal Transformations
     UML Model                   (UML to xUnit)
                                                                        xUnit Model


     Platform Independent Model                                                  OR




                                                       Vertical Transformation        Vertical Transformation
                                                             (xUnit to JUnit)               (xUnit to SUnit)




                                                         JUnit Test Case                SUnit Test Case
     Platform Specific Model

                                                                                                                11
An Example Sequence Diagram
                                                                                                                   Work Done


Session            ATM            Transaction            Withdrawl       Simulation        CardReader        CustomerConsole



                                       readCard( )
                                                                                readCard( )
                                                                                  card
                                        card
                            readPIN( promptMessage )
                                                                                      readPIN( promptMessage )
                                                                                              pin
                                        pin
              makeTransaction
          ( atm, session, card, pin)
                                                     readMenuChoice( )
                                                                                         readMenuChoice( )
                                                                                              choice
                                                         choice


     . . .

                                                                                                                       12
Model-Driven Test Case Generator (MTCG)
                                                                            Work Done



   Sequence of
   Method Calls
     (SMC)

                                                        JUnit Code
                            MTCG                      Test Case
                                                  (    with test data   )




    Test Data
     Test Data
      Test Data




   Compare actual and expected return values of methods
   Capture execution traces using Daikon tracing tool


                                                                               13
 Test Case Generation
  UML Model to xUnit Model
   xUnit Model to Test Case                                                                                                      Work Done
   Step 1                                                                                 Step 2
                                                         5
                                                                                                        6
                                             Model to Model
                                             Transformation                                 Model to Text
                                             Specifications                                 Transformation
                                                                                            Specifications



                                      horizontal                                                    vertical
               2                                                                 3
       SMC                       transformation rules                 xUnit                   transformation rules                            9
          m
    Meta- - odel                                                   Meta- model
                                                                          -                                                     Test Data
                                                                                                                                   Test Data
                                                                                                                                    Test Data

                    source metamodel            target metamodel                     source metamodel             data


                                         7                                                              8
                                     Tefkat                                                      MOFScript                                    10
      Instance of                  Model to Model                    Instance of                  Model to Text               Code Header
                                   Transformation                                                Transformation
                                       Tool                                                          Tool




                        source model            target model                             source model             test case
                1
                                                                                 4                                               JUnit Code 11
    SMC Model
                                                                   xUnit Model                                                   Test Case
                                                                                                                              ( with test data)



A. Javed, P. Strooper, and G. Watson, "Automated Generation of Test Cases Using Model-Driven Architecture, "
                                                                                                                                         14
Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Automation of Software Test, Minneapolis, USA, 2007
User Inputs to MTCG
                                                                                Work Done


  SMC Model            <SequenceDiagram name="withdrawal">
      readCard
   
                             <Message name="Simulation::readCard">
       readPIN                    <ExpectedValue name="card" value="">
                                        <SimpleAttribute name="number" value="1"/>

  Test Data                      </ExpectedValue>
                             </Message>

    XML format              <Message name="Simulation::readPIN">
                                   <Parameter name="prompt" value="Please enter PIN."/>
    Parameters and               <ExpectedValue name="pin" value="42"/>
                             </Message>
       expected value
                             ....
                        </SequenceDiagram>




                                                                                     15
MTCG Output - JUnit Test Case
                                Work Done




                                   16
Inputs to the Methodology
         Platform Independent Input                                                                                                  Work Done

         Platform Dependent Input
         Test Specific Input
                                                  5
                                                                                                  6
                                   Model to Model
                                                                                    Model to Text
                                   Transformation
                                                                                   Transformation
                                   Specifications
                                                                                   Specifications



                              horizontal                                                  vertical                   Test Data 9
   SMC 2                 transformation rules                  xUnit
                                                                       3           transformation rules                Test Data
                                                                                                                       Test Data
Meta-model                                                   Meta-model


              source metamodel            target metamodel                 source metamodel             data


                                   7                                                          8
Instance of                      Tefkat                      Instance of                MOFScript
                            Model to Model                                              Model to Text               Code Header 10
                            Transformation                                             Transformation
                                 Tool                                                       Tool




         1        source model            target model                          source model            test case
SMC Model                                                              4                                             JUnit Code 11
                                                             xUnit Model                                                Test data)
                                                                                                                    (with testCase
                                                                                                                                        17
Limitations of MTCG
                                    Work Done


   Simple meta-model for SMC

   SMC model is created manually

   Traces are compared manually




                                       18
Outline

   Problem and Context

   Aims / Goals

   Work Done

   Plan and Contributions




                             19
The Model-Driven Framework for Context-
Dependent Testing of Components
                                                    Plan and
                                                  Contributions
   Modelling component usage scenarios and
    devising test cases
      using use case charts

   Evaluating and extending test adequacy of
    the generated test cases
        using component certification metadata

   Executing the test cases
        Adapting MTCG for components



                                                       20
Use Case Charts
                                                                                                                           Plan and
     Specify precise use cases                                                                                          Contributions


     Extension of activity diagram
     Advantages
        Automation of software
              development activities

         Modeling and Testing of
              component-based software

         Generating execution
              orders of scenarios


    J. Whittle, "Specifying precise use cases with use case chart,” Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3844, 2005
                                                                                                                              21
Component Certification
                                                                                                                             Plan and
                                                                                                                           Contributions
          Third-party certification1
             Conducted by neutral organization
             Context independent
             Costly

          Developer certification2
             Test cases are attached to component as metadata
             Context independent


1.   W. Councill, "Third-Party Testing and the Quality of Software Components," IEEE Softw., vol. 16, 1999, pp. 55-57.
2.   J. Morris, G. Lee, K. Parker, G. Bundell, and C. Lam, "Software Component Certification," Computer, vol. 34, 2001, pp. 30-36.
                                                                                                                                     22
Evaluating Test Adequacy
                                                                                Plan and
                                                                              Contributions
   Potential Adequacy of CDCT
       CT – CDCT = ø     Context-Dependent
                          Component Testing                  Component Testing
       CT – CDCT ≠ ø           CDCT                               CT


   Adequacy of CT
       CDCT – CT = ø
       CDCT – CT ≠ ø         CDCT - CT                       CT– CDCT
                                              CDCT ∩ CT




                        Weakness in CT                             Potential weakness
                                                                        in CDCT
                                         Component acceptability
                                            for the context

                                                                                        23
Extending Test Adequacy
                                                                              Plan and
                                                                            Contributions

   Using CT - CDCT
                        Context-Dependent
   Using CDCT - CT     Component Testing
                              CDCT
                                                           Component Testing
                                                                 CT




                            CDCT - CT                       CT– CDCT
                                            CDCT ∩ CT




                      Weakness in CT                             Potential weakness
                                                                      in CDCT
                                       Component acceptability
                                          for the context

                                                                                      24
Criteria for Comparing Test Cases
and Test Suites
                                                      Plan and
                                                    Contributions

   Comparing Test Cases
      Same sequence of method calls
      Same parameter values
      Same equivalence class of parameter values

   Comparing Test Suites
      Simple comparison
      Using state machines


                                                         25
Adapting MTCG for Components
                                                                               Plan and
                                                                             Contributions
 Object 1    Object 2                      Component   Object 3   Object 4




            Interface Method




                        Interface Method



                        Interface Method




                                                                                  26
Contributions
                                                                   Plan and
                                                                 Contributions

   Model-driven framework for context-dependent testing of
    components
   Algorithm to derive test requirements from use case charts
   Method for evaluating and extending test adequacy
   Algorithms for comparing test cases and test suites
   Prototype tool support for the framework
   Evaluation of the framework and the tool support



                                                                      27
Tasks
                                                                              Plan and
   Development of the framework and tool support
                                                                            Contributions

    1.   Defining a case study
    2.   Devising an algorithm to determine test requirements from use case charts
    3.   Proposing and evaluating criteria for comparing test cases and test suites
    4.   Providing prototype tool support for the proposed framework
    5.   Applying the framework and tool support to the case study

   Evaluation of the framework and tool support
    6.   Defining a case study for evaluation of the framework
    7.   Evaluating the framework and the tool support on a case study
    8.   Analysis of the data collected during evaluation

   Thesis Writing
    9.   Parts of the thesis will be written up as the work progresses
                                                                                 28
Timeline
             Plan and
           Contributions




                29
Thank You




            Questions




                        30
Genericity of the Approach

   xUnit-based Approach


                            MOFScript Rules
                     (Vertical Transformation-Artifact 6)

                                     xUnit - SUnit          xUnit - JUnit

      Total Rules                          9                     9
      Rules with Same Structure                      7
      Total Lines of Code                 323                   330
      Common Lines of Code                           282
      % Reuse                                        85


                                                                            31
SMC Meta-model
                                        Named Element



 Interaction
                          Interaction

 Message                                                                                 Literal String

                      ordered
 Class                         *
                          Message           *         owner   Class

 Parameter
 Expected Value                                  *
                                        *       Parameter             DataValue

 Constructor Parameter   1
                                                                                  *
                      ExpectedValue
                                                                               Complex Value
                                                                                                   *


                                                                                      *
                                                                           *   Scalar Value
                                                                                                           32
xUnit Meta-model

                  Named Element

 Test Suite
                                  Test Suite

 Test Case
                                        *
                                  Test Case
 Assertion
                                        *
 Complex Value                    Assertion
                                  type: String
                                                 *   ExpectedValue   DataValue



 Scalar Value                          *                                        *
                                    Method       *     Parameter              Complex Value
                                                              *

                                  OwnerClass                                         *
                                                                          *   Scalar Value




                                                                                             33
SMC Model

   Methods
       readCard( )
       readPIN( )

       makeTransaction( )
       performTransaction( )

       ejectCard ( )




                                34
    xUnit Model

   Assertions
       readCard
       readPIN
       makeTransaction
       performTransaction
       ejectCard




                             35