1. SWE 3643_2016_Lesson_3 PSP Data / Review / Inspection from kindergarten to college
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

2. PSP Overview PSP3 PSP2.1 PSP2 PSP1.1 PSP1 PSP0.1 PSP0
Cyclic development
PSP2.1
Design templates
PSP2
Code reviews
Design reviews
PSP1.1
Task planning
Schedule planning
PSP1
Size estimating
Test report
PSP0.1
Size measurement
Process improvement
proposal (PIP)
PP1. Was Size & PIP in Janet’s project?
PSP0
Time recording
Defect recording
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

3. What should be the Phase Order?
The PSP looks like a waterfall process but it’s not.
The phase order is determined by the dependencies between phases.
You can’t test the code before it’s compiled.
You can’t compile the code before it’s written.
You can’t use the design if it’s produced after the code is written.
There’s no reason to make a plan after you’re done.
Conclusion…start here with a plan.
Test
Compile
Code
Design
Plan
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

4. Process Flow for PSP1
When programs are small or well understood, you can execute the phases in order.
Produce a plan.
Design all modules.
Code all modules.
Compile the coded program.
Summarize the project data during the postmortem.

5. Cyclic Process Flow -1
Large programs or those that are not well understood may require an iterative approach.
In this example the design is completed in one step.
Two modules are identified during the design, modules A and B.
Then each module is separately coded, compiled, and tested.
This example uses the PSP0 phases and two cycles of code-compile-test.
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

6. Cyclic Process Flow -2
There can be more than two cycles and cycles can also include the design phase as in this example.
Note that each cycle is focused on producing part of the program, e.g. Module A, Module B, Module C.
Part size is a key factor for determining cycles.
a line of code is too small
a program may be too large
One or more classes, methods, procedures, or functions are probably the right size.
You need to determine what works for you.
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

7. Program Size Type Relationships
Base program
New program
Added & Modified
Possibly animate this diagram to introduce the pieces one at a time (new reused last)
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

8. The Project Planning Framework
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

9. PSP 1 introduces PROBE Steps in the PROBE Method
Describe the steps in the PROBE method
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

10. Inspection and Review
The main objective of an Inspection or a Review is to Detect Defects.
(Today -there may be some other goals or broader definition of what a “defect” includes ---- )
This activity and procedure was first formalized by Mike Fagan of IBM during a period when CPU was still much more costly than people, and system complexity increased to the point where software quality became a huge issue.
Inspections and reviews are testing of software artifacts without the actual execution of code and is especially suited for :
Requirements - documents
Design - documents
Plans and Tests Cases – documents
Customer education material - documents
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

11. Inspection may be a Natural Part of Software Development
Document
Requirements
Analysis
most often used
Inspect
Document
Design
less often used
Inspect
Code & doc.
Inspect
Test Cases
Code &
Manuals
Inspect
Test Cases
Functional Test
least often used
Component
Test
Inspect
Test Cases
System Test
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

12. Introduction to (Inspection/Review) Activity
Some Resistance
What’s the value?
Why so formal?
How to include into an already tight schedule?
Who should be involved?
What do you think ?
Compare the cost of bug found by customer ?
Would people take this seriously, otherwise?
Would code test time decrease enough?
How reliable are your “friends?” in telling you the truth?
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

13. Introduction of Review/Inspection Activities into Professional Organizations
Must have complete “buy-in” --- (how do you do this? - use cost analysis?)
Upper management
Project leaders
Team members
Must provide training for inspection/review:
Not natural for people to look for defects ---- we like to show things work
Delivering negative comments in a positive fashion
Focus on defects and not just “better” solution
Prioritize the problems and not dwell on minor problems
Agree on defect types, definitions, and severity
Reviewers must be “prepared” --- read and understand the material
Must keep good records and act on the result
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

14. General Review Sub-Process Framework
Conduct the
Review &
Analyze results
Plan and Schedule
the Review
Appoint
a moderator
Report
Final Result(s)
Follow-up &
(Re-inspection-
If needed)
Error corrections
& ( Rework
if needed)
rework and re-inspections are optional
and needed only if the review results
did not meet some prior criteria
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

15. Inspection/Review Sub-Process (more details) Assuming no Re-review
Activity ( almost sequential )
“output”
Responsible
Appoint moderator
“responsible/trained” moderator
Project mgr
set review date; review material disseminated;
review team organized, review “rules” set;
review-checklist (if applicable) and “gols”
established
Plan, schedule, organize the review
Moderator
materials read; organized set of defects found
while preparing for the actual review;
priorities of found defects set; written down
questions for the review
Reviewers
Prepare for review
Moderator,
Reviewers &
Review material
owner
Pre-review: review rules re-explained,
Post review: list of “agreed upon” prioritized
problems; list of resolved
problems; list of questions
to be resolved (all lists must be
“trackable”)
Decision: re-review needed decision–based on
goals, problem resolution schedule
Conduct the review
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

16. Inspection/Review Sub-Process (more details)
Activity
“output”
Responsible
Fix the defects in the material and
provide them to the moderator
review material
owner
Fixed material
Moderator &
reviewers
Ensures the fixes are indeed correct
by having the reviewer “sign off”
“Signed off” Fixed material
Final review report which contains the
“previously agreed upon” statistics from the
Review and any recommendation based on the
project quality goals.
Prepare the final report and
disseminate the final review report
Moderator
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

17. Participants of a Review
Author of the material
Inspectors :
customer
designer
requirements analyst
programmer
tester
trainer
Moderator
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

18. Trained Participants Moderator : Inspectors:
schedule and ensure the inspectors are ready for inspection
keep the group to the major task of defect finding
moderate the discussions and keep the activity moving
arbitrate and decide on the defect severity level
record, analyze, and report on the review results (may involve an assistant)
follow up on the review
report on the final result
Inspectors:
look for defects first versus look for “best” alternatives
establish what works (not promoted by all practitioners of inspections)
critical with the product, not the person (very hard to do, but must)
participate in deciding on the severity of the defects found
take the inspection result to their own “downstream” domain of activities
because buggy areas deserve more attention and preparation
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

19. Defect severity definitions Rework and Re-Inspection guidelines
Review Preparations
Schedule :
material reading time by the participants
actual inspection time
defect fixing and rework time
follow-up (re-review if necessary)
documenting and reporting on inspection results
Defect severity definitions
severity levels and defect types
Rework and Re-Inspection guidelines
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

20. Review Preparation (cont.)
Review for “defects” How? ( Establish what’s important)
Consider the categories of items that are important (based on goal)
Functionality
Reliability
Usability
Performance
Security
Etc.
Within each category, prioritize the items (e.g.)
Product Installation : priority 1
Existence of a specific function or feature: priority 1
Product displays error messages: priority 2
Tool bar icons: priority 1
Tool bar icon explanations: priority 1
Drop down window defaults: priority 1
Prioritization of Drop down window defaults: priority 3
Most do not
get this sophisticated
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

21. Have an idea of what’s important (problems) Example: Defect Severity levels by problem impact
Level 1 : Catastrophic error which causes the whole system to be down and possible loss of life.
Level 2 : An error that will cause a major functional failure and there is no work around.
Level 3 : An error that will cause a major functional error but there is a manual work around.
Level 4 : An error that will cause a minor error or system degradation.
Level 5 : A cosmetic level error that may be fixed at the next most convenient time
How do these apply to Requirements Review?
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

22. Rework and Re-Inspection Guidelines
These guidelines must be set ahead of time.
What should rework guidelines be ?
All defects found in an inspection should be reworked and fixed? (for what type of products?)
All severity level 1 through level 3 must be reworked and fixed before the inspected artifact may be declared complete.
Should requirements and design artifacts be under a stricter rule ?
What should Re-Inspection guideline be ?
Re-inspect the complete artifact if there is “x” number of severity level 1 problems ?
Re-inspect only the rework and fixes for severity 1 and 2 problems ?
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection

23. What Have We Learned ?
Inspections and reviews are expensive and time consuming
Inspections and reviews do bring down defect rates and also :
force some discipline into an organization
brings awareness of quality focus
helps in setting milestone marks (inspection exit)
Inspection and Reviews should be used selectively
mostly on non-executables
error prone and complex areas
new areas (new functions, new employees, new domain)
SWE 3643 Lesson 3 PSP & Review/Inspection