|
Similar eBooks: eBooks related to TSL ( Test Script Language) |
Architectures of Test Automation
Many of the ideas in this presentation were jointly developed with Doug Hoffman, in a course that we taught together on test automation, and in the Los Altos Workshops on Software Testing (LAWST) and the Austin Workshop on Test Automation (AWTA). ∙ LAWST 5 focused on oracles. Participants were Chris Agruss, James Bach, Jack Falk, David Gelperin, Elisabeth Hendrickson, Doug Hoffman, Bob Johnson, Cem Kaner, Brian Lawrence, Noel Nyman, Jeff Payne, Johanna Rothman, Melora Svoboda, Loretta Suzuki, and Ned Young. ∙ LAWST 1-3 focused on several aspects of automated testing. Participants were Chris Agruss, Tom Arnold, Richard Bender, James Bach, Jim Brooks, Karla Fisher, Chip Groder, Elizabeth Hendrickson, Doug Hoffman, Keith W. Hooper, III, Bob Johnson, Cem Kaner, Brian Lawrence, Tom Lindemuth, Brian Marick, Thanga Meenakshi, Noel Nyman, Jeffery E. Payne, Bret Pettichord, Drew Pritsker, Johanna Rothman, Jane Stepak, Melora Svoboda, Jeremy White, and Rodney Wilson. ∙ AWTA also reviewed and discussed several strategies of test automation. Participants in the first meeting were Chris Agruss, Robyn Brilliant, Harvey Deutsch, Allen Johnson, Cem Kaner, Brian Lawrence, Barton Layne, Chang Lui, Jamie Mitchell, Noel Nyman, Barindralal Pal, Bret Pettichord, Christiano Plini, Cynthia Sadler, and Beth Schmitz. I�m indebted to Hans Buwalda, Elizabeth Hendrickson, Alan Jorgensen, Noel Nyman , Harry Robinson, James Tierney, and James Whittaker for additional explanations of test architecture and/or stochastic testing
Functional Test Automation
F unctional testing assures that your implementation of SAP meets your business requirements. Given the highly configurable and tightly integrated nature of the SAP modules, as well as the probability that you will also integrate in-house applications or third-party plug-ins, it is a critical and challenging task requiring the verification of hundreds or even thousands of business processes and the rules that govern them. This chapter explores the business case for automating your functional testing, the alternative automation approaches to consider, and organizational considerations and techniques for maintaining and managing your test automation assets
Functional test automation tools
This volume is a component of the Yphise Software Assessment Report (see chapter entitled �Yphise Software Assessment Reports�). It is designed to monitor developments of the software product market and to select a short list. � It assesses the maturity and opportunities of the products available. � It highlights the list of software products that we consider of interest to large companies. Our experience has shown that products do not always satisfactorily provide the functions that we expect, based on vendor positioning. As a result, many improper selections of software products are made. � It highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each software product, based on our detailed assessment conducted according to our ISO 9001-certified methodology. It provides a topdown ranking of the products and it outlines our opinion.
A Vision for Automated Testing
TT-Medal is a European research project on tests and testing methodologies for advanced languages. In TT-Medal key roles are assigned to international standards, the Testing and Test Control Notation (TTCN-3) by ETSI and ITUT, the Unified Modelling Language (UML2.0) and its testing profile by the OMG. Reading this white paper provides you a summary on the state of the art of test tools, an introduction to TT-Medal achievements, in particular insight into the industrial case studies that have been performed in the project. Three major directions for research are addressed: a common test tool infrastructure, approaches for the automatic generation of TTCN-3 tests, and the integrated system and test development. Our conclusion picks up these directions and attempts to describe a future picture for automated testing in the next years
Automated Testing with WWW::Mechanize
Humans make mistakes Bugs cost time & money Bugs are demoralizing Testing shows that your code works At least in the cases that you're testin
Homebrew Test Automation
Bret Pettichord, a software testing expert and an influential author and speaker, joined ThoughtWorks in July 2004. Mr. Pettichord serves ThoughtWorks, Inc. as a test architect, implementing effective technologies for automated testing and promoting responsible methodologies for agile testing and quality assurance. His software testing philosophy is context-driven, focusing on uncovering important risks, maintaining close relations with programmers, and using agile testing methods that provide rapid feedback. He has broad experience using commercial and open-source tools for automated testing. Mr. Pettichord is a founder of the Context-Driven School of software testing, which sees testing as a technical investigation of software risk that requires skill, adaptability and tact. He co-authored Lessons Learned in Software Testing (a Jolt Award finalist) to explain the thinking of the School. He has published over two dozen papers on software testing and test automation. His ideas about homebrew automation, agile testing and testability have been featured in Application Development Trends and The Rational Edge. As a member of the Agile community, he has regularly hosted workshops that have brought together leading testers and programmers to assess and develop methods for testing on agile projects. Mr. Pettichord founded the Austin Workshop on Test Automation in 2000. It�s a yearly event that brings together leading test automators. He has been regularly contributing to similar workshops since the first meeting of the Los Altos Workshop on Software Testing in 1996. He regularly speaks at conferences around the world.
Software Automated Testing Guidelines
Most of today�s enterprise software is developed using some variant of agile process like RUP [8]. The main idea of these processes is to break-up the whole big project into many small manageable parts. Each part is released to the client, while the subsequent releases integrate with the older one. These kinds of processes have their own benefits for all the stakeholders. Once a project is complete and the whole product is fully deployed, the product goes into the maintenance phase. Software in general and enterprise applications in specific should not resist changing. Due to this reason these days software are built using pluggable components. Any component could be changed anytime as the needs arise. There could be numerous reasons for the change. We are not discussing the reasons to initiate these changes but one thing is obvious that in today�s volatile world change is inevitable in the software. In the above two scenarios, it is notable that software testing team has to do lot of regression testing. In scenario one, whenever a new iteration is complete and it is merged with the previous release, the inspection team has to thoroughly test the new functionality while running the regression test on the previous release, to make sure that integration is smooth. In a big enterprise application the amount of software, to be regression tested, increases. In scenario two, mostly the client changes are too small as compared to the size of the whole project. Again the result is that once the change is implemented, inspection team has a lot of testing work as far as regression testing is concerned. Although software organizations try to circumvent this situation by intelligently analyzing and segregating software parts which could potentially malfunction and hence are good candidate of regression testing. But this method has its potential risks. Iterative development and changes initiated by client are not the only situations when testing team has lot of work to do. Different organizations perform different testing cycles on their releases. Similarly after each bug fix, localized regression is performed. So the workload of inspection team is ever increasing [5]. In this paper, we are not discussing that how an organization could choose from its repertoire of choices. Our focus is to present guidelines for an organization, which has already decided to go for automated testing. Automated software testing is comparatively a newer approach of testing and lot of myths surrounds this technique. In section 2, we have discussed various testing alternatives. Automated testing is one of them. In section 3, we have discussed some benefits of automated testing. In section 4, a few challenges of automation have been discussed briefly. In rest of this paper, a prescription or guidelines for an organization which has already arrived at the decision to use automated testing, have been suggested in detail.
Agile Automation Testing
What is Agile Automation Testing? Automation of the test cases done for the Agile project means applying the agile values and principles for doing the automation of the test cases. The biggest difference between agile methods and traditional method of testing is the short feedback loop. The concept of agility is nothing more, than "build the most important module of the system, evaluate, adjust, and repeat". Effective automation requires thoughtful investment and is a very important tool for shortening the feedback loop. In agile methods the majority of the automated tests consist of unit tests that verify the smallest possible modules of software and can be executed very quickly. Applying agile values and principles helps teams get traction in starting their automation efforts. It makes it possible to execute the test set many times a day or even many times an hour and shortens the feedback loop even more. The paper describes how to apply agile values, principles and practices to develop an automation strategy. Where to start from, how to start, what you shouldn�t automate, and where you should proceed with caution this paper describes it all.
Automated testing for mainframeproducts
Aspire used WinRunner and Test Director to verify and validate all existing and new product features of the customer's mainframe integration product suite. The automation scripts developed by Aspire were much appreciated by the customer � they were robust, configurable and reusable. This reduced testing cycle times and improved product qualit
Automated Testing of Distributed Systems
We present a technique to test servers that interact with clients using the Sun RPC protocol. The technique requires the user to provide two things: a list of RPC calls for the server being tested, and a set of invariants that are required to hold over the RPC communications trace between a set of clients and the server. The technique works by generating random sequences of RPC calls and checking that the invariants holds over the traces. If an invariant is violated, the violating sequence of RPC calls is reported to the user. We report the results of our testing a block server and a lock server
TSL ( Test Script Language) - Free eBook TSL ( Test Script Language) - Download ebook TSL ( Test Script Language) free
|
|
|