Correlated active clause coverage for cal() preconditions in Software Assign PDF417 in Software Correlated active clause coverage for cal() preconditions

Table 3.6. Correlated active clause coverage for cal() preconditions using barcode integration for software control to generate, create barcode pdf417 image in software applications. Web service m2 1 t t t F t t t t t pdf417 2d barcode for None t t t t t t t F t t t t t t t t t t t t F t t t t t t t t t t t t F t t t t t t t t t t t t F t t t t t t t t t t t t F t t t m2 12 m1 m2 d1 1 d1 31 d2 1 d2 31 t t t t t t t t t F t t y 1 t t t t t t t t t t F t y 10000 t t t t t t t t t t t F. m1 1 t t F t t t t t t t t t m1 12. 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9 .

10. 11. 12.

. m1 1 = T m1 1 = F m1 Software pdf417 2d barcode 12 = F m2 1 = F m2 12 = F m1 m2 = F d1 1 = F d1 31 = F d2 1 = F d2 31 = F y 1=F y 10000 = F. T F t t t t t t t t t t Coverage Criteria We might try to satisfy t his requirement with only two tests, but some clauses are related and cannot both be false at the same time. For example, month1 cannot be less than 1 and greater than 12 at the same time. The true test for predicate coverage allows all clauses to be true, then we use the following tests to make each clause false: (month1 = 1, month2 = 2, day1 = 0, day2 = 0, year = 0) and (month1 = 13, month2 = 14, day1 = 32, day2 = 32, year = 10500).

We must rst nd how to make each clause determine the predicate to apply the ACC criteria. This turns out to be simple with disjunctive normal form predicates all we have to do is make each minor clause true. To nd the remaining tests, each other clause is made to be false in turn.

Therefore, CACC (also RACC and GACC) is satis ed by the tests that are speci ed in Table 3.6. (To save space, we use abbreviations of the variable names.

). EXERCISES Section 3.4. Consider the remove() met hod from the Java Iterator interface. The remove() method has a complex precondition on the state of the Iterator, and the programmer can choose to detect violations of the precondition and report them as IllegalStateException. 1.

Formalize the precondition. 2. Find (or write) an implementation of an Iterator.

The Java Collection classes are a good place to search. 3. Develop and run CACC tests on the implementation.

. 3.5 LOGIC COVERAGE OF FINITE STATE MACHINES 2 discussed the applicat ion of graph coverage criteria to nite state machines (FSMs). Recall that FSMs are graphs with nodes that represent states and edges that represent transitions. Each transition has a pre-state and a post-state.

FSMs usually model behavior of the software and can be more or less formal and precise, depending on the needs and inclinations of the developers. This text views FSMs in the most generic way, as graphs. Differences in notations are considered only in terms of the effect they have on applying the criteria.

The most common way to apply logic coverage criteria to FSMs is to use logical expressions from the transitions as predicates. In the Elevator example in 2, the trigger and thus the predicate is openButton = pressed. Tests are created by applying the criteria from Section 3.

2 to these predicates. Consider the example in Figure 3.5.

This FSM models the behavior of the memory seat in a car (Lexus 2003 ES300). The memory seat has two con gurations for two separate drivers and controls the side mirrors (sideMirrors), the vertical height of the seat (seatBottom), the horizontal distance of the seat from the steering wheel (seatBack), and the lumbar support (lumbar). The intent is to remember the con gurations so that the drivers can conveniently switch con gurations with the press of a button.

Each state in the gure has a number for ef cient reference..
Copyright © . All rights reserved.