Testing in the Software Development Life Cycle

Sponsored Links:

The aim of testing is to reduce risk.Unknown factors in the development and design of new application can derail a project andminor risks may be delayed. By using a check cycle and the resolution can identify the level of risk,make informed decisions and ultimately, reduce uncertainty and eliminate errors.The check is the only device in the arsenal of development, which reduces defects. Planning, design and quality controlcan reduce the number of defects that fall in to a product, but can not eliminate those who arealready there. And any type of encoding will introduce more errors, since it involves changingsomething of a known nice state to a state unknown, unproved.Ideally, testing should be conducted throughout the development life cycle. Most of the time (as inthe waterfall model) is basically stuck in the back. If the purpose of testing is to reducerisk, this means accumulating risk throughout the project to solve the final - in itself a risky tactic.Could it be that this is a valid approach. By allowing developers to focus on building applicationcomponents and then at a later date, the alter to the rectification of the issues allowedpartition their efforts and focus on three type of task at a time.But as the gap between development and the resolution increases so does the complexity of the solutionissues (see "first check, check often" on nextc hapter). In any reasonably giant application development project delay is long. To better disseminate the various phases of testing throughoutlifecycle to detect errors as soon as possible.


Another function of the check is (curiously) to confirm what has been delivered.Given a complex project with hundreds or perhaps thousands of game holder requirements, how does that have implemented them all? How to try during yourtests or launch a particular requirement has been met? How can you track the progress delivery of a particular requirement during development?This is the problem of traceability.How does a map requirement of a design element (in the technical specification, for example)and how that map to an element of code that implements this check and how to mapdemonstrate that it's correctly applied?In a simple project is sufficient to construct a table that is out. In a giant scale project ofextensive requirements to overwhelm such traceability. It is also possible that a singlerequirement is met multiple elements in the design or a single element in thedesign satisfies multiple requirements. This makes the tracking reference number difficult.If you require a better solution, I would suggest an integrated technique to track the requirements for you.There outside the platform has tools that use databases to track the requirements. These are thenrelated to similar specifications and tools to provide as traceability. A technique like this canautomatically produces reports that highlight the requirements are not delivered or not tested. These systemsalso be associated with SCM (Application Configuration Management) and can be veryexpensive, depending on the level of functionality.See the section on "change management" for a discussion of these systems.

No comments: