Bushra LATIF, Tauseef RANA

4933

A preliminary survey on software testing practices in Khyber PakhtunKhwa region of Pakistan

Conducted to ensure the quality of software products, the software testing process has a great significance in the software development and is the vital step of the verification and validation process. For conforming a software feature to the end user requirements, organizations rely on extensive testing procedures. Despite being the key factor, many of the software development industries/companies do not define/follow a systematic testing process. In this paper, we analyze/learn from the conducted surveys in the past and formulate a questionnaire for a survey in the northern region of Pakistan. To the best of our knowledge, no such survey has ever been conducted in Pakistan. Thus, our work can be used as a baseline for such surveys in other regions or for a survey at the country level. This survey focuses on various aspects of testing methodologies and techniques. With the analyses of the survey findings, we conclude that a testing “maturity” model based on the cultural/organizational/political values/constraints should be devised for the improvement of current testing practices to ensure the production of quality software. The survey is regional but the results and knowledge obtained are in line with the related surveys conducted in other regions of the globe.
Keywords:

Empirical software testing, Software testing practices, software quality Khyber PakhtunKhwa Pakistan, software development verification and validation process,

PDF

___

  • [1] Sung PW, Paynter J. Software testing practices in New Zealand. In: National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications Conference; New Zealand; 2006. pp. 273-282.
  • [2] Garousi V, Zhi J. A survey of software testing practices in Canada. Journal of Systems and Software 2013; 86(5): 1354-1376. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2012.12.051
  • [3] Garousi V, Coşkunçay A, Betin-Can A, Demirörs O. A survey of software engineering practices in Turkey. Journal of Systems and Software 2015; 108: 148-177. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.06.036
  • [4] Ng SP, Murnane T, Reed K, Grant D, Chen TY. A preliminary survey on software testing practices in Australia. In: IEEE Software Engineering Conference; Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; 2004. pp. 116-125.
  • [5] Wissink T, Amaro C. Successful test automation for software maintenance. In: IEEE International Conference of Software Maintainance; Philadelphia, PA, USA; 2006. pp. 265-266.
  • [6] Parnin C, Orso A. Are automated debugging techniques actually helping programmers? In: ACM International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis; New York, NY, USA; 2011. pp. 199-209
  • [7] Du Bousquet L, Zuanon N. An overview of Lutess a specification-based tool for testing synchronous software. In: IEEE Automated Software Engineering Conference; Cocoa Beach, FL, USA; 1999. pp. 208-215.
  • [8] Karhu K, Repo T, Taipale O, Smolander K. Empirical observations on software testing automation. In: IEEE Software Testing Verification and Validation Conference; Denver, CO, USA; 2009. pp. 201-209.
  • [9] Runeson P, Andersson C, Höst M. Test processes in software product evolution—a qualitative survey on the state of practice. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution Research and Practice 2003. 15(1): 41-59. doi: 10.1002/smr.26.
  • [10] Torkar R, Mankefors S. A survey on testing and reuse. In: IEEE International Conference on Software Science Technology and Engineering; Herzlia, Israel; 2003. pp. 164-173.
  • [11] Taipale O, Smolander K, Kälviäinen H. Finding and ranking research directions for software testing. In: Software Process Improvement European Conference; Budapest, Hungary; 2005. pp. 39-48.
  • [12] Grindal M, Offutt J, Mellin J. On the testing maturity of software producing organizations. In: IEEE Testing Academic and Industrial Conference-Practice And Research Techniques; Windsor, UK; 2006. pp. 171-180.
  • [13] Martin D, Rooksby J, Rouncefield M, Sommerville I. ’Good’organisational reasons for’Bad’software testing: An ethnographic study of testing in a small software company. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 29th international conference on Software Engineering; MN, USA; 2007. pp. 602-611.
  • [14] Engström E, Runeson P. A qualitative survey of regression testing practices. In: International Conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement; Limerick, Ireland; 2010. pp. 3-16.
  • [15] Causevic A, Sundmark D, Punnekkat S. An industrial survey on contemporary aspects of software testing. In: IEEE International conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST); Washington, DC, USA; 2010. pp. 393-401.
  • [16] Nanthaamornphong A, Carver JC. Test-Driven Development in scientific software: a survey. Software Quality Journal 2017. 25(2): 343-372. doi: 10.1007/s11219-015-9292-4
  • [17] Lazic L, Mastorakis N. Cost effective software test metrics. WSEAS Transactions on Computer 2008; 7(6): 599-619. doi: 0.1007/s10009-014-0332-3
  • [18] Swinkels R. A comparison of TMM and other test process improvement models. MB-TMM Project Report. Frits Philips Institute, 2000.
  • [19] Veenendaal V. Guidelines for testing maturity. Professional Tester 2002. 3(2): 21-24.
  • [20] Neto AD, Subramanyan R, Vieira M, Travassos GH. Characterization of model-based software testing approaches. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Workshop on Empirical Assessment of Software Engineering Languages and Technologies: Held in Conjunction with the 22nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE); Atlanta, Georgia, USA; 2007. pp. 31-36.
  • [21] Burnstein I, Suwanassart T, Carlson R. Developing a testing maturity model for software test process evaluation and improvement. In: IEEE International Test Conference; Washington, DC, USA; 1996. pp. 581-589.
  • [22] Michael F and Ina S. A taxonomy of risk-based testing. The International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 2014 16(5): 559-568. doi: 10.1007/s10009-014-0332-3
  • [23] Black R. Pragmatic Software Testing: Becoming an Effective and Efficient Test Professional. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
  • [24] Andersin J. TPI-a model for Test Process Improvement. Department of Computer Sciences, University of Helsinki Finland 2004.
  • [25] Sommerville I. Software Engineering. 8th ed.USA: Addison-Wesley, 2007.
Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science-Cover
  • ISSN: 1300-0632
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 6 Sayı
  • Yayıncı: TÜBİTAK
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Kanu GOEL, Shalini BATRA

Fatih KORKMAZ

Qing DUAN, Wanxing SHENG, Guanglin SHA, Zhen LI, Caihong ZHAO, Penghua LI, Chunyan MA

Bushra LATIF, Tauseef RANA

Gaurav GOYAL, Mohan AWARE

Gökhun SELÇUK, Kaan ÜÇEL

Hojatollah SOLEYMANI, Sobhan ROSHANI

H. Seçkin DEMİR, Erdem AKAGÜNDÜZ

Engin ZEYDAN, Ahmet YILDIRIM

Erdinç AVAROĞLU, Taner TUNCER