1. Software Self-Testing
This work has been supported by the European Social Fund within the project «Support for Doctoral Studies at University of Latvia».
Software Self-Testing
Edgars Diebelis
Prof. Dr. sc. comp. Jānis Bičevskis

2. Self-Testing
Ability to execute stored test examples to ensure that software functionality is correct.
Testing approach
Manual testing;
Automated testing with testing tools;
Self-Testing.

3. Content Problem statement. Concept of Self-Testing.
Implementation of Self-Testing.
Comparison of the Self-Testing Concept with Conventional Testing Support Tools.
Efficiency Measurements of Self-testing.
Conclusions.

4. Problem Statement
„Computing systems’ complexity appears to be approaching the limits of human capability”
(Kephart, J., O., Chess, D., M.).
IBM Autonomic Computing Manifest, 2001
outlined four key features that characterise autonomic computing.
Smart Technology approach, 2007
identified seven types of the smart technology;
self-testing is one of the type of the smart technology.

5. Concept of Self-Testing

6. Self-Testing Functionality
Self-testing contains two components:
Test cases of system’s critical functionality to check functions, which are substantial for system using;
Built-in mechanism (software component) for automated software testing (regression testing) that provides automated running of test cases and comparing test results with standard values.

7. Test storage file (XML)
Test storage mode
Test storage file (XML) 1. 2. 3.

8. Test storage file (XML)
Self-Testing mode
Test storage file (XML)
Self-Testing tool 1. 2. 4. 6. 3. 5.

9. Test Points
Test point is a programming language command in the software text.
Test point ensures that:
particular actions and field values are saved when storing tests;
the software execution outcome is registered when tests are executed repeatedly.
By using test points, it is possible to repeat the execution of system events.

10. Test Point Types Test point types: input field test point;
comparable value test point;
system message test point;
SQL query result test point;
application event test point;
test execution criteria test point;
self-testing test points;
etc. 10 10

11. Implementation of Self-Testing

12. Build of Self-Testing Self-Testing tool modules: Self-Testing module;
Self-testing test management module. 12 12

13. Self-Testing in use

15. Comparison of the Self-Testing Concept with Conventional Testing Support Tools

16. Testing Tools Selection
Automated Testing Institute (ATI) opinion.
“ATI Automation Honors ” awards.
Since May 2009, the ATI has been publishing its magazine Automate Software Testing.
Website has a list of 716 automated testing tools.
ATI annual conference on automated testing (Verify/ATI).
~8000 registred users.

17. Testing Tools TestComplete FitNesse Ranorex T-Plan Robot
the best commercial automated functional testing tool in 2010
FitNesse
the best open source code automated functional testing tool in the NET sub- category in 2010
Ranorex
the best commercial automated functional testing tool in the NET and Flash/Flex sub-categories in 2010
T-Plan Robot
the best open source code automated functional testing tool in the Java sub- category in 2010
Rational Functional Tester
in 2009 and 2010, it was a finalist among the best commercial automated functional and performance testing tools
HP Unified Functional Testing Software
the best commercial automated functional testing tool in 2009
Selenium
the best open source code automated functional testing tool in 2009 and 2010

18. Criteria for Comparison
Testing method (TM)
Test automation approach (TAA)
Test automation framework (TAF)
Testing level
Test recording and playback
Desktop applications testing
Web applications testing
Services testing
Database testing
Testing in production environment
System user can create tests
Simultaneous running of several tests
Performing simultaneous actions
Identifying the tested object
Test result analysis
Test editing
Screenshots
Control points
Object validation
Object browser
Test log
Test schedule planner
Identification of the end of command execution
Plug-ins and extensions
etc.

19. Comparison

20. Comparison II 20 20

21. Self-Testing further development
New Test automation frameworks.
Test editor and log.
Object validation and object browser.
Load, stress and other testing levels.
Web applications and services testing.
Additional platforms.
Plug-ins and extensions.
Integration with external environment testing.

22. Self-Testing advantages
White box testing.
Testing in production environment.
Users without in-depth IT knowledge to define and run test cases.
Testing external interfaces.
Perform system testing without specific preparation for running the test.

23. Efficiency Measurements of Self-testing

24. Efficiency Measurements
Retrospective analysis of incident notifications in a real project.
It is not possible to apply and compare two different concepts in the same conditions.
Analysis of incident notifications (1,171 in total) in the CSAS in the period from July 2003 to 23 August
Subjective opinion; however, the high number of incident notifications and the statistics do reflect trends. 24 24

25. Statistics of Incident Notifications
Type of Incident
Quantity
% of total
Hours
Duplicate 68
5.81
23.16
0.47
User error 43
3.67
67.46
1.37
Unidentifiable bug
178
15.2
20.52
Identifiable bug
736
62.85
66.79
Improvement
102
8.71
241.36
4.89
Consultation 44
3.76
293.92
5.96
Total:
1171
100
4931.6 25 25

26. Bugs Unidentifiable by the Self-testing
Bug type
Quantity
% of total
External interface bug 5
2.81
Computer configuration bug 12
6.74
Data type bug 7
3.93
User interface bug 25
14.04
Simultaneous actions by users
Requirement interpretation bug 41
23.03
Specific event 83
46.63
Total:
178
100 26 26

27. Bugs Identifiable by the Self-testing
Test point
Quantity
% of total
Hours
File result test point 59
8.02
150.03
4.56
Input field test point
146
19.84
827.14
25.11
Application event test point
105
14.27
364.24
11.06
Comparable value test point 28
3.8
93.53
2.84
System message test point 11
1.49
58.84
1.79
SQL query result test point
387
52.58
54.65
Kopā:
736
100 27 27

28. Conclusions

29. Conclusion
self-testing approach offers not only options equal to those offered by other globally recognized testing support tools; moreover, self-testing additionally offers options that other testing tools do not possess:
testing external interfaces;
testing in production environment;
testing with the white-box method;
possibility for users without IT knowledge to capture tests.
Testing support is part of systems developed and it is available throughout the entire life cycle of software.

30. Conclusion II
Self-testing changes the testing process by considerably broaden the role of the developer in software testing.
Self-testing requires additional work to include the self-testing functionality in the software and to develop critical functionality tests.
Self-testing saves time by repeated (regression) testing of the existing functionality.
Implementation of the self-testing functionality is useful in incremental development models, in particular in systems that are gradually improved and maintained for many years.

31. Thank You!