CddMeeting01082008: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| (24 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:CDD]] | [[Category:CDD]] | ||
=CDD Meeting, Tuesday, 8.1.2008, 10:00 | =CDD Meeting, Tuesday, 8.1.2008, 10:00= | ||
== Next Meeting == | == Next Meeting == | ||
* Friday, 11.1.2008, 10:00 | * Friday, 11.1.2008, 10:00 | ||
== Tasks == | == Tasks == | ||
* | * Add filters and tags for extracted, manual tests and automated tests | ||
* Fix extraction for tuples -> DONE | |||
* Fix extraction for tuples -> DONE | |||
* Look at/fix test case execution for agents (Stefan) | * Look at/fix test case execution for agents (Stefan) | ||
* | * CDD log window in IDE (Arno) | ||
* "New manual test case" Button (Arno) | |||
* "New manual test case" Button ( | * Better Icons for GUI (Arno) | ||
* Better Icons for GUI | |||
** http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/ | ** http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/ | ||
** http://tango.freedesktop.org/Tango_Icon_Library | ** http://tango.freedesktop.org/Tango_Icon_Library | ||
* Status / Progress bar ( | * Status / Progress bar (Arno) | ||
* Port to 6.1 (?, probably only after Beta 1) | * Port to 6.1 (?, probably only after Beta 1) | ||
* Manual re-run to find true prestate (Jocelyn, | * Manual re-run to find true prestate (Jocelyn, Stefan) | ||
* Logging | * Logging (Stefan) | ||
** What data to log? | ** What data to log? | ||
** Implement storing | ** Implement storing | ||
** Define how students should submit logs | ** Define how students should submit logs | ||
* Data Gathering (Stefan) | |||
** Define what data to gather | |||
** Define how to process gather data | |||
* Forumulate Experiment Hypothesis (Andreas) | * Forumulate Experiment Hypothesis (Andreas) | ||
* Define Project for SoftEng (Manu) | * Define Project for SoftEng (Manu) | ||
* | ** Find System level test suite for us to test students code | ||
* | ** Find project with pure functional part | ||
* "Execute visible test cases only" Button (?) | |||
* Restore open nodes and selection after grid update (Arno) | * Restore open nodes and selection after grid update (Arno) | ||
** Maybe better/easier solved via incremental updates from tree | ** Maybe better/easier solved via incremental updates from tree | ||
* Automate CDD System level tests (Stefan) | |||
* Install CDD in student labs (Manu) | |||
* Pause test execution and compilation during regular compilation and execution (Arno) | |||
* Automate CDD System level tests | * Add most important convenience routine to CDD_TEST_CASE (Stefan) | ||
* Install CDD in student labs | * Add failure context window (Arno) | ||
* Pause test execution and compilation during regular compilation and execution | |||
* Add most important convenience routine to CDD_TEST_CASE | |||
* Add failure context window | |||
** Maybe also additional information such as previous outcomes? | ** Maybe also additional information such as previous outcomes? | ||
* | * Check why Gobo slows down compilation of project not using gobo when melting (performance issue for compiling interpreter) | ||
* Fix AutoTest for courses | |||
** Integrate AUT_TEST_CASE into CDD_TEST_CASE hierarchy | |||
** Variable declaration for failing test cases | |||
** New release | |||
* Move logs below cdd_tests | |||
* Environment variable (or better user preference) for qualifying class names (to avoid svn conflicts) | |||
* Uniqe id to tag test cases with. To be used in logs. So test logs are resiliant to test class renamings | |||
* While extracting test cases, flag objects that are target to a currently executing routine | |||
* During setup check inv of all objects that are not flaged | |||
== Software Engineering Project == | == Software Engineering Project == | ||
| Line 50: | Line 58: | ||
== Data to harvest == | == Data to harvest == | ||
* IDE Time with CDD(extraction) enabled / IDE Time with CDD(extraction) disabled | |||
* Test Case Source (just final version, or all versions?) | * Test Case Source (just final version, or all versions?) | ||
* TC Meta Data | ** Use Profiler to get coverage approximation | ||
* TC Meta Data (with timestamps -> Evolution of Test Case) | |||
** TC Added/Removed | ** TC Added/Removed | ||
** TC Outcome | ** TC Outcome (transitions from FAIL/PASS/UNRESOLVED[bad_communication <-> does_not_compile <-> bad_input]) | ||
** TC execution time | ** TC execution time | ||
** Modificiations to a testcase (compiler needs to recompile) | |||
* Development Session Data | |||
** IDE Startup | |||
** File save | |||
* Questionnairs | * Questionnairs | ||
** Initial | ** Initial | ||
** Final | ** Final | ||
==Experiment Hypotheses== | |||
===Use of CDD increases development productivity=== | |||
* Did the use of testing decrease development time? | |||
* This can be meassured by either looking at | |||
** Number of compilations | |||
** Number of saves | |||
** Number of revisions | |||
** IDE time | |||
** Asking the students | |||
None of the above strikes me as particualry reliable though. Also, it is easy to develop quickly if you do a bad job. | |||
In order to compare apples to apples we must be careful to compare projects with a similar correcntess and completeness. We could use an external test suite to assess correctness, or the grade of the students. | |||
===Use of CDD increases code correctness=== | |||
* Is there a relation between code correctness of project (vs. some system level test suite) and test activity? | |||
Measures for test activity: | |||
* number of tests | |||
* number of times test were run | |||
* Number of pass/fail, fail/pass transitions | |||
===Developer Profile=== | |||
* How did students use the testing tools. | |||
* Are ther clusters of similar use? | |||
* What is charactersitic for these clusters? | |||
* Meassures: | |||
** Aksing students before and after | |||
** Are there projects where tests initially always fail resp. pass | |||
** How often do they test? | |||
** How correct is their project? | |||
I am not completely sure yet what to assess here. | |||
===How do extracted, synthesized and manually written test cases compare?=== | |||
* Which tests are the most useful to students? | |||
* How many tests are there in each category? | |||
* What's the test suite quality of each category? | |||
* Were some excluded from testing more often than others? | |||
* How many red/green and green/red transitions are there in each category? | |||
* Which had compile-time errors most often that did not get fixed? | |||
Latest revision as of 10:20, 11 January 2008
CDD Meeting, Tuesday, 8.1.2008, 10:00
Next Meeting
- Friday, 11.1.2008, 10:00
Tasks
- Add filters and tags for extracted, manual tests and automated tests
- Fix extraction for tuples -> DONE
- Look at/fix test case execution for agents (Stefan)
- CDD log window in IDE (Arno)
- "New manual test case" Button (Arno)
- Better Icons for GUI (Arno)
- Status / Progress bar (Arno)
- Port to 6.1 (?, probably only after Beta 1)
- Manual re-run to find true prestate (Jocelyn, Stefan)
- Logging (Stefan)
- What data to log?
- Implement storing
- Define how students should submit logs
- Data Gathering (Stefan)
- Define what data to gather
- Define how to process gather data
- Forumulate Experiment Hypothesis (Andreas)
- Define Project for SoftEng (Manu)
- Find System level test suite for us to test students code
- Find project with pure functional part
- "Execute visible test cases only" Button (?)
- Restore open nodes and selection after grid update (Arno)
- Maybe better/easier solved via incremental updates from tree
- Automate CDD System level tests (Stefan)
- Install CDD in student labs (Manu)
- Pause test execution and compilation during regular compilation and execution (Arno)
- Add most important convenience routine to CDD_TEST_CASE (Stefan)
- Add failure context window (Arno)
- Maybe also additional information such as previous outcomes?
- Check why Gobo slows down compilation of project not using gobo when melting (performance issue for compiling interpreter)
- Fix AutoTest for courses
- Integrate AUT_TEST_CASE into CDD_TEST_CASE hierarchy
- Variable declaration for failing test cases
- New release
- Move logs below cdd_tests
- Environment variable (or better user preference) for qualifying class names (to avoid svn conflicts)
- Uniqe id to tag test cases with. To be used in logs. So test logs are resiliant to test class renamings
- While extracting test cases, flag objects that are target to a currently executing routine
- During setup check inv of all objects that are not flaged
Software Engineering Project
- One large project, but divided into testable subcomponents
- Students required to write test cases
- Fixed API to make things uniformly testable
- Public/Secret test cases (similar to Zeller course)
- Competitions:
- Group A test cases applied to Group A project
- Group A test cases applied to Groupt B project
Data to harvest
- IDE Time with CDD(extraction) enabled / IDE Time with CDD(extraction) disabled
- Test Case Source (just final version, or all versions?)
- Use Profiler to get coverage approximation
- TC Meta Data (with timestamps -> Evolution of Test Case)
- TC Added/Removed
- TC Outcome (transitions from FAIL/PASS/UNRESOLVED[bad_communication <-> does_not_compile <-> bad_input])
- TC execution time
- Modificiations to a testcase (compiler needs to recompile)
- Development Session Data
- IDE Startup
- File save
- Questionnairs
- Initial
- Final
Experiment Hypotheses
Use of CDD increases development productivity
- Did the use of testing decrease development time?
- This can be meassured by either looking at
- Number of compilations
- Number of saves
- Number of revisions
- IDE time
- Asking the students
None of the above strikes me as particualry reliable though. Also, it is easy to develop quickly if you do a bad job. In order to compare apples to apples we must be careful to compare projects with a similar correcntess and completeness. We could use an external test suite to assess correctness, or the grade of the students.
Use of CDD increases code correctness
- Is there a relation between code correctness of project (vs. some system level test suite) and test activity?
Measures for test activity:
- number of tests
- number of times test were run
- Number of pass/fail, fail/pass transitions
Developer Profile
- How did students use the testing tools.
- Are ther clusters of similar use?
- What is charactersitic for these clusters?
- Meassures:
- Aksing students before and after
- Are there projects where tests initially always fail resp. pass
- How often do they test?
- How correct is their project?
I am not completely sure yet what to assess here.
How do extracted, synthesized and manually written test cases compare?
- Which tests are the most useful to students?
- How many tests are there in each category?
- What's the test suite quality of each category?
- Were some excluded from testing more often than others?
- How many red/green and green/red transitions are there in each category?
- Which had compile-time errors most often that did not get fixed?