Test Inspected Unit or Inspect Unit Tested Code?

Atul Gupta, P. Jalote
{"title":"Test Inspected Unit or Inspect Unit Tested Code?","authors":"Atul Gupta, P. Jalote","doi":"10.1109/ESEM.2007.52","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Code inspection and unit testing are two popular fault- detecting techniques at unit level. Organizations where inspections are done generally supplement it with unit testing, as both are complementary. A natural question is the order in which the two techniques should be exercised as this may impact the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the verification process. In this paper, we present a controlled experiment comparing the two execution-orders, namely, code inspection followed by unit testing (CI-UT) and unit testing followed by code inspection (UT-CI), performed by a group of fresh software engineers in a company. The subjects inspected program-units by traversing a set of usage scenarios and applied unit testing by writing JUnit tests for the same. Our results showed that unit testing can be more effective, as well as more efficient, if applied after code inspection whereas the later is unaffected of the execution- order. Overall results suggest that sequence CI-UT performs better than UT-CI in time-constrained situations.","PeriodicalId":124420,"journal":{"name":"First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2007)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2007)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2007.52","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Code inspection and unit testing are two popular fault- detecting techniques at unit level. Organizations where inspections are done generally supplement it with unit testing, as both are complementary. A natural question is the order in which the two techniques should be exercised as this may impact the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the verification process. In this paper, we present a controlled experiment comparing the two execution-orders, namely, code inspection followed by unit testing (CI-UT) and unit testing followed by code inspection (UT-CI), performed by a group of fresh software engineers in a company. The subjects inspected program-units by traversing a set of usage scenarios and applied unit testing by writing JUnit tests for the same. Our results showed that unit testing can be more effective, as well as more efficient, if applied after code inspection whereas the later is unaffected of the execution- order. Overall results suggest that sequence CI-UT performs better than UT-CI in time-constrained situations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测试测试单元还是测试单元测试代码?
代码检查和单元测试是两种常用的单元级故障检测技术。进行检查的组织通常用单元测试来补充检查,因为两者都是互补的。一个自然的问题是这两种技术的运用顺序,因为这可能影响到核查过程的总体效力和效率。在本文中,我们提出了一个对照实验,比较两种执行顺序,即代码检查后的单元测试(CI-UT)和单元测试后的代码检查(UT-CI),由公司的一组新软件工程师执行。主题通过遍历一组使用场景来检查程序单元,并通过为这些场景编写JUnit测试来应用单元测试。我们的结果表明,如果在代码检查之后应用单元测试,则可以更有效,也更高效,而后者不受执行顺序的影响。总体结果表明,在时间限制的情况下,序列CI-UT比UT-CI表现更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparing Model Generated with Expert Generated IV&V Activity Plans Decision Support with EMPEROR A cost effectiveness indicator for software development Fine-Grained Software Metrics in Practice Automated Information Extraction from Empirical Software Engineering Literature: Is that possible?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1