Differential testing: a new approach to change detection
Proceedings of the the 6th joint meeting of the European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on The foundations of software engineering
Differential testing: a new approach to change detection
The 6th Joint Meeting on European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on the foundations of software engineering: companion papers
Automated Software Engineering
Language and Tool Support for Class and State Machine Refinement in UML-B
FM '09 Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Formal Methods
Refining nodes and edges of state machines
ICFEM'11 Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Formal methods and software engineering
Refinement of statemachines using event b semantics
B'07 Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Formal Specification and Development in B
Hi-index | 0.00 |
A behavioural theory of object compatibility is presented, which has implications for object-oriented regression testing. The theory predicts that only certain models of state refinement yield compatible types, dictating the legitimate design styles to be adopted in object statecharts. The theory also predicts that conformity-testing using regression tests is inadequate. Functionally complete test-sets that are applied as regression tests to subtype objects are usually expected to cover the functionality of the original type, even though they are clearly not expected to cover extra functionality introduced in the subtype. However, such regression testing is proven to cover strictly less than the original state-space in the new context and so provides much weaker confidence than expected. A different retesting model is proposed, based on full automatic test regeneration from the subtype's specification. This method can guarantee equivalent levels of confidence after retesting. The behavioural conformity desired by regression testing can then be proven by verification in the theory. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.A version of this paper was originally presented at UKTest 2005: The Third U.K. Workshop on Software Testing Research, held at the University of Sheffield, U.K., 5–6 September 2005. It is reproduced here in revised and extended form with the permission of the Workshop organizers