ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Unit-level test adequacy criteria for visual dataflow languages and a testing methodology
Full text PdfPdf (6.25 MB)
Source
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) archive
Volume 18 ,  Issue 1  (September 2008) table of contents
Article No. 1  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISSN:1049-331X
Authors
Marcel R. Karam  American University of Beirut, New York, NY
Trevor J. Smedley  Dalhousie University
Sergiu M. Dascalu  University of Nevada Reno
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 18,   Downloads (12 Months): 241,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1391984.1391985
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Visual dataflow languages (VDFLs), which include commercial and research systems, have had a substantial impact on end-user programming. Like any other programming languages, whether visual or textual, VDFLs often contain faults. A desire to provide programmers of these languages with some of the benefits of traditional testing methodologies has been the driving force behind our effort in this work. In this article we introduce, in the context of prograph, a testing methodology for VDFLs based on structural test adequacy criteria and coverage. This article also reports on the results of two empirical studies. The first study was conducted to obtain meaningful information about, in particular, the effectiveness of our all-Dus criteria in detecting a reasonable percentage of faults in VDFLs. The second study was conducted to evaluate, under the same criterion, the effectiveness of our methodology in assisting users to visually localize faults by reducing their search space. Both studies were conducted using a testing system that we have implemented in Prograph's IDE.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Agrawal, H., Horgan, J., London, S., and Wong, W. 1995. Fault localization using execution slices and dataflow tests. In Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering. 143--151.
 
2
 
3
Azem, A., Belli, F., Jack, O., and Jedrzejowicz, P. 1993. Testing and reliability of logic programs. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering. 318--327.
 
4
Belli, F. and Jack, O. 1995. A Test coverage notion for logic programming. In Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 133--142.
5
 
6
Boulus, J., Karam, M. R., Koteiche, Z., and Ollaic, H. 2006. XQueryViz: An XQuery visualization tool. In Proceedings the 10th International Conference on Extended Database Technologies. Munich, Germany, 1155--1158.
 
7
 
8
 
9
Christ, R. 1975. Review and analysis of color coding research for visual displays. Human Factors. 17, 6, 542--570.
 
10
 
11
 
12
Del Frate, F., Garg, P., Mathur, A., and Pasquini, A. 1995. On the correlation between code coverage and software reliability. In proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering. 124--132.
 
13
Fisk, D. 2003. Full metal jacket: A pure visual dataflow language built on top of Lisp. In Proceedings of the International Lisp Conference. New York, NY, 232--238.
 
14
 
15
Frankl, P., Weiss, S., Weyuker, E. J. 1985. ASSET: A system to select and evaluate tests. In Proceedings of the IEE Conference on Software Tools. 72--79.
 
16
 
17
Gren, T. R. G. and Petre, M. 1996. Usability analysis of visual programming environments: A “cognitive dimensions” framework. J. Visual Lang. Comput. 7, 2, 131--174.
 
18
Gupta, R., Harrold, M. J., and Soffa, M. L. 1996. Program slicing-based regression testing techniques. J. Softw. Test. Veri. Rel. 6, 2, 83--112.
 
19
Harrold, M. J. and Soffa, M. L. 1988. An incremental approach to unit testing during maintenance. In Proceedings of the Conference on Software Maintenance. 362--367.
20
 
21
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
Kelso J. 2002. A visual programming environment for functional languages. Ph. D. Thesis. Murdoch University, Australia.
 
26
Kimura, T. D., Choi, J. W., and Mack, J. M. 1990. Show and tell: a visual programming language. In E. P. Glinert Ed. Visual Progrmming Environments. IEEE Computer Society Press, 397--404.
 
27
Kuhn, W. and Frank, A. U. 1997. The use of functional programming in the specification and testing process. In Proceedings of the International Conference and Workshop on Interoperating Geographic Information Systems.
 
28
 
29
30
 
31
Luo, G., Bochmann, G., Sarikaya, B., and Boyer, M. 1992. Control-flow based testing of Prolog programs. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering. 104--113.
 
32
Marten#8482;. 2007. http://www.andescotia.com.
 
33
 
34
 
35
Ntafos, S. C. 1984. On required element testing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 10, 6, 795--803.
 
36
 
37
Ouabdesselam, F. and Parissis, I. 1995. Testing techniques for dataflow synchronous programs. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Automated and Algorithmic Debugging. 249--260.
 
38
 
39
 
40
41
 
42
43
 
44
Shafer, D. 1994. The Power of Prograph CPX, The Reader Network.
 
45
 
46
Weiser, M. 1984. Program slicing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 10, 4, 352--357.
 
47
 
48
 
49
50
 
51
 
52
Yang, S., Burnett, M., Dekoven, E., and Zloof, M. 1997. Representation design benchmarks: a design-time aid for VPL navigable static representations. J. Visual Lang. Comput. 8, 5/6, 563--599.
 
53

Collaborative Colleagues:
Marcel R. Karam: colleagues
Trevor J. Smedley: colleagues
Sergiu M. Dascalu: colleagues