Development and maintenance efforts testing graphical user interfaces: a comparison

Antonia Kresse, Peter M. Kruse
{"title":"Development and maintenance efforts testing graphical user interfaces: a comparison","authors":"Antonia Kresse, Peter M. Kruse","doi":"10.1145/2994291.2994299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For testing of graphical user interfaces many tools exists. The aim of this work is a statement regarding the advantages and disadvantages of various testing tools with regard to their use in the economic context to be taken. It is compared, inter alia, whether there are differences in the generations of test tools in terms of finding defects and which tool has the lowest development and maintenance costs. Results show that with QF-Test test suites can be created the quickest while EggPlant has the shortest maintenance time. TestComplete performs worse in both disciplines. For test robustness, no clear picture can be drawn. The selection of a test tool is typically done once in a project at the beginning and should be considered carefully.","PeriodicalId":255079,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Automating Test Case Design, Selection, and Evaluation","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Automating Test Case Design, Selection, and Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2994291.2994299","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

For testing of graphical user interfaces many tools exists. The aim of this work is a statement regarding the advantages and disadvantages of various testing tools with regard to their use in the economic context to be taken. It is compared, inter alia, whether there are differences in the generations of test tools in terms of finding defects and which tool has the lowest development and maintenance costs. Results show that with QF-Test test suites can be created the quickest while EggPlant has the shortest maintenance time. TestComplete performs worse in both disciplines. For test robustness, no clear picture can be drawn. The selection of a test tool is typically done once in a project at the beginning and should be considered carefully.
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
开发和维护工作测试图形用户界面:比较
对于图形用户界面的测试,存在许多工具。这项工作的目的是一个关于各种测试工具的优点和缺点的声明,考虑到它们在经济背景下的使用。它是比较的,特别是,在发现缺陷方面,测试工具的世代之间是否存在差异,以及哪个工具具有最低的开发和维护成本。结果表明,使用QF-Test可以最快地创建测试套件,而茄子的维护时间最短。TestComplete在这两个方面的表现都较差。对于测试稳健性,没有清晰的图像可以绘制。测试工具的选择通常在项目开始时完成一次,应该仔细考虑。
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
Modernizing hierarchical delta debugging MT4A: a no-programming test automation framework for Android applications Complete IOCO test cases: a case study Development and maintenance efforts testing graphical user interfaces: a comparison PredSym: estimating software testing budget for a bug-free release
×
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