Difference between revisions of "CddMeeting01082008"
(→‎Data to harvest)
Line 71: Line 71:
 
** Initial
 
** Initial
 
** Final
 
** Final
 +
 +
==Experiment Hypothesis==
 +
 +
1) CDD makes development easier/more productive
 +
2) CDD makes more correct code
 +
3) Profile of students (dev a, deb b style comparison)
 +
4) Given 3 kinds of test. what actually gets used and how effective is it?

Revision as of 05:48, 8 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, but needs testing, there are probably still problems with agents, but it's not certain if related to tuples or extraction (Stefan)
  • Look at/fix test case execution for agents (Stefan)
  • Add non-commited test cases (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


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

  • Test Case Source (just final version, or all versions?)
    • Use Profiler to get coverage approximation
  • TC Meta Data (with timestamps)
    • TC Added/Removed
    • TC Outcome
    • TC execution time
  • Development Session Data
    • IDE Startup
    • File save
  • Questionnairs
    • Initial
    • Final

Experiment Hypothesis

1) CDD makes development easier/more productive 2) CDD makes more correct code 3) Profile of students (dev a, deb b style comparison) 4) Given 3 kinds of test. what actually gets used and how effective is it?

Retrieved from "https://dev.eiffel.com/index.php?title=CddMeeting01082008&oldid=10240"