Data processing: software development – installation – and managem – Software program development tool – Testing or debugging
Reexamination Certificate
1999-05-24
2003-02-18
Morse, Gregory (Department: 2122)
Data processing: software development, installation, and managem
Software program development tool
Testing or debugging
C717S107000, C717S108000, C717S165000, C714S001000, C714S025000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06523169
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention is directed to a method for testing system components of an object-oriented program wherein arbitrary methods are replaced by stubs and a test frame generator generates stubs that have the same call and return parameters available to them as a function being replaced for simplified testing purposes.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Criteria for the comparison of methods, particularly comparative methods of different presentation possibilities of an object-oriented program are explained in W. Archert, “Objektorientiert analysieren—Ein Übeblick der wichtigsten Methoden”, Electronik 3/96, pages 80-86. Further, advantages of object-oriented programming are presented, particularly with regard to modularity and portability.
In the development of a software system, it is meaningful to test the individual system components in isolation before the test of the overall system. For example, individual program modules or—given an object-oriented development—classes are system components. The problem often arises in the class or module test that a test unit (class or, respectively, module) is highly dependent on other test units. Such dependencies derive, for example, from the mutual employment of functions (or methods, given the employment of classes). The result thereof, however, is that all other test units U that are used by A (directly or indirectly because, for example, U in turn uses other units) must already be present for the test of a test unit A.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
Accordingly, an object of the present invention is to simplify and speed up the testing of such test units.
In order to avoid this problem, the present invention produces substitute functions with a dummy functionality for the functions and/or methods from other test units U used by the test unit A. Such substitute functions are also called “stubs”. Even when a function/method is already implemented, it can be meaningful for the test of other functions/methods to replace this with a stub.
As a result thereof, the complexity of the test frame can be kept low.
The present invention describes the automatic generation of a minimum set of complete substitute functions (stubs) for employment in the class and/or module test. What is thus meant is that all functions/methods that are declared in the software but whose implementation is either not yet present or, on the other hand, cannot be used for complexity reasons are automatically implemented as substitute functions (stubs). Care is thereby exercised that both the return parameter and the handover parameter of the function/method are generated equivalent to the original function/method for the substitute function. A test frame class is locally instanced in the function/method for the implementation of the substitute function. This test frame class encapsulates an automatic status unit that is defined by the parameters (both return handover parameters) of the function that is replaced by the stub. When farther-reaching logical operations are to be implemented within the stub, this can be manually supplemented.
When the software system begins the test run, a branch is made in the stub according to the preset mode of the test frame class. For example, the mode can be that interactive commands corresponding to a command set of an interpreter integrated in the test frame class are allowed at a command prompt or a command datafile that, for example, generates outputs according to the command of the command datafile is implemented in the substitute function. After the interaction or, respectively, the execution of the command datafile, a branch is made from the substitute function back into the calling module. As soon as it is called, a further substitute function makes the same functionality available with the parameters it has. Thus, specific tests can be implemented for all substitute functions with the one test frame class. The encapsulation of the test frame class as a separate automatic status unit enables the flexible employment in every substitute function. The test frame class instanced for the substitute function is initialized with parameters (both handover and return parameters). Type-specific operations that are interactively called or called from a command datafile can be defined, therefore, in the test frame class.
An advantageous development of the inventive method is sound in the interactive employment of the test frame class. This interaction represents a function scope of an integrated debugger with the command set defined in the test frame class. As in a debugger, commands can be interactively implemented on the parameters visible in the current function.
REFERENCES:
patent: 5345231 (1994-09-01), Koo et al.
patent: 5475843 (1995-12-01), Halviatti et al.
patent: 5615333 (1997-03-01), Juettner et al.
patent: 5724589 (1998-03-01), Wold
patent: 5751941 (1998-05-01), Hinds et al.
patent: 5892949 (1999-04-01), Noble
patent: 5907704 (1999-05-01), Gudmundson et al.
patent: 5923867 (1999-07-01), Hand
patent: 5987245 (1999-11-01), Gish
patent: 6031990 (2000-02-01), Sivakumar et al.
patent: 6052691 (2000-04-01), Ardoin et al.
patent: 6071317 (2000-06-01), Nagel
patent: 6085233 (2000-07-01), Jeffrey et al.
patent: 6175956 (2001-01-01), Hicks et al.
patent: 6182117 (2001-01-01), Christie et al.
patent: 6182278 (2001-01-01), Hamada et al.
patent: 6223306 (2001-04-01), Silva et al.
patent: 6275976 (2001-08-01), Scandura
patent: 6421634 (2002-07-01), Dearth et al.
patent: 44 16 704 (1995-11-01), None
patent: 0 056 064 (1982-07-01), None
patent: 0 679 004 (1995-10-01), None
patent: WO 94/14117 (1994-06-01), None
Title: Creating Graphical Interactive Application Objects by Demonstration, author: Myers et al, ACM, 1989.*
Title: Dost: An Environment to Support Automatic Generation of User Interfaces, author: Dewan et al, ACM, 1986.*
8070 Communications of the ACM 37 (1994) Sep. No. 9, New York pp. 59-77.
Obkektorientiert analysieren pp. 80-86.
Bell Boyd & Lloyd LLC
Das Chameli C.
Morse Gregory
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
LandOfFree
Method for testing system components of an object-oriented... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method for testing system components of an object-oriented..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method for testing system components of an object-oriented... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3120293