Practitioners' Views on Good Software Testing Practices
Proceedings - 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice, ICSE-SEIP 2019, Page: 61-70
2019
- 36Citations
- 431Usage
- 67Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations36
- Citation Indexes36
- 36
- CrossRef5
- Usage431
- Downloads404
- Abstract Views27
- Captures67
- Readers67
- 67
Conference Paper Description
Software testing is an integral part of software development process. Unfortunately, for many projects, bugs are prevalent despite testing effort, and testing continues to cost significant amount of time and resources. This brings forward the issue of test case quality and prompts us to investigate what make good test cases. To answer this important question, we interview 21 and survey 261 practitioners, who come from many small to large companies and open source projects distributed in 27 countries, to create and validate 29 hypotheses that describe characteristics of good test cases and testing practices. These characteristics span multiple dimensions including test case contents, size and complexity, coverage, maintainability, and bug detection. We present highly rated characteristics and rationales why practitioners agree or disagree with them, which in turn highlight best practices and trade-offs that need to be considered in the creation of test cases. Our findings also highlight open problems and opportunities for software engineering researchers to improve practitioner activities and address their pain points.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85072108857&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/icse-seip.2019.00015; https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8804445/; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sis_research/4479; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5482&context=sis_research
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know