Browse Prior Art Database

Method to differentiate code coverage metrics for exercised and tested code

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000245894D
Publication Date: 2016-Apr-18
Document File: 3 page(s) / 63K

Publishing Venue

The IP.com Prior Art Database

Abstract

Method to differentiate code coverage metrics for exercised and tested code

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 53% of the total text.

Page 01 of 3

Method to differentiate code coverage metrics for exercised and tested code

When software is written, it is normal to write tests that ensure that the code works as expected. Additionally, code coverage tools are used to measure how much of the product code has been exercised by the test code.

    Although code coverage metrics can be measured there is generally concern about the value that the metric provides. This disclosure seeks to improve the fidelity of code coverage metrics, providing an improved view of a product's quality.

    Test code often contains set-up and clean-up code outside of the actual testing. Code coverage metrics would include these in the code coverage metrics, giving a higher percentage coverage than has actually been tested,
An example:

    A test does field validation on one field in a wizard (in a product GUI). The test code would:

1. Perform any pre-requisites to launching the wizard, 2. Open the wizard, 3. Perform field validation on one field in the wizard 4. Close the wizard.

    Of these steps, only step 3 is actually performing a test and checking the results of the actions.

    The code coverage metric would include all four of these steps. For example, the code that draws all the other fields in the wizard would also be included in the code coverage metrics but not tested.

    This disclosure describes a simple process to filter the code coverage metrics to differentiate between code that has been tested and code that has merely been exercised.

    This disclosure provides a method for identifying which part of the test code is simply exercising the product without testing the output, e.g. in the Set up and Clean up parts of the test code, and which parts of the test code are actually testing the product.

    Test code often contains set-up and clean-up code outside of the actual testing. Code coverage metrics would include these in the code coverage metrics, giving a higher percentage coverage than has actually been tested,

An example:

    
A test does field validation on one field in a wizard (in a product GUI). The test code would:

1. Perform any pre-requisites to launching the wizard, 2. Open the wizard, 3. Perform field validation on one field in the wizard 4. Close the wizard.

    Of these steps, only step 3 is actually performing a test and checking the re...