home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
- Path: sparky!uunet!think.com!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!claird
- From: claird@NeoSoft.com (Cameron Laird)
- Subject: Re: >>> Value of High Code Coverage Metrics in Testing - Request for Opinion
- Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:16:41 GMT
- Message-ID: <Bz96Bu.EBw@NeoSoft.com>
- References: <ssimmons.724336081@convex.convex.com>
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <ssimmons.724336081@convex.convex.com> ssimmons@convex.com (Steve Simmons) writes:
- .
- .
- .
- >> 2) Is it a cost effective excersize to get engineers to achieve a particular
- >> %BFA as a completion criteria?
- >
- >Sure... if you have the time in the schedule and effective tools to do it.
- PARTICULARLY if you don't have time in the schedule.
- Try it; in my experience, people learn a lot from their
- first coverage exercises. It's far better to learn
- those things *before* shipping the product.
- >Usually, it is best to have people do coverage analysis on their own code
- >and have people who don't know the code test it for unanticipated conditions.
- >
- >> 3) What is a realistic %BFA to aim for?
- >
- >Fairly low percentage of 50% is usually the maximum possible value. Much
- >code is assertion testing. However, every condition should be accounted.
- 85%. Serious.
- .
- .
- .
- If you're lucky, Brian Marick will tune in to this
- conversation; he's the gentleman with the most ex-
- perience and insight on this topic.
- --
-
- Cameron Laird
- claird@Neosoft.com (claird%Neosoft.com@uunet.uu.net) +1 713 267 7966
- claird@litwin.com (claird%litwin.com@uunet.uu.net) +1 713 996 8546
-