DOCSLIB.ORG

Perceptions of Code Quality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Perceptions of Code Quality “I know it when I see it” – Perceptions of Code ality ITiCSE’17 Working Group Report∗ Jürgen Börstler Harald Störrle Daniel Toll Blekinge Institute of Technology QAware GmbH Linnæus University Karlskrona, Sweden Munich, Germany Kalmar, Sweden [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Jelle van Assema Rodrigo Duran Sara Hooshangi University of Amsterdam Aalto University George Washington University Amsterdam, The Netherlands Helsinki, Finland Washington, DC, USA [email protected] rodrigo.duran@aalto. [email protected] Johan Jeuring Hieke Keuning Carsten Kleiner Utrecht University Windesheim University of Applied University of Applied Sciences & Arts Utrecht, The Netherlands Sciences Hannover [email protected] Zwolle, The Netherlands Hannover, Germany [email protected] [email protected] Bonnie MacKellar St John’s University Queens, NY, USA [email protected] ABSTRACT The groups showed signicant dierences in the sources they use Context. Code quality is a key issue in software development. The for learning about code quality with education ranked lowest in all ability to develop high quality software is therefore a key learning groups. goal of computing programs. However, there are no universally Conclusions. Code quality should be discussed more thoroughly accepted measures to assess the quality of code and current stan- in educational programs. dards are considered weak. Furthermore, there are many facets to code quality. Dening and explaining the concept of code quality CCS CONCEPTS is therefore a challenge faced by many educators. •General and reference ! Evaluation; •Social and professional Objectives. In this working group, we investigated code quality as topics ! Quality assurance; Computer science education; perceived by students, educators, and professional developers, in Software engineering education; particular, the dierences in their views of code quality and which quality aspects they consider as more or less important. Further- KEYWORDS more, we investigated their sources for information about code Code quality, programming. quality and its assessment. Methods. We interviewed 34 students, educators and professional ACM Reference format: developers regarding their perceptions of code quality. For the Jürgen Börstler, Harald Störrle, Daniel Toll, Jelle van Assema, Rodrigo Duran, Sara Hooshangi, Johan Jeuring, Hieke Keuning, Carsten Kleiner, interviews they brought along code from their own experience to and Bonnie MacKellar. 2017. “I know it when I see it” – Perceptions of Code discuss and exemplify code quality. Quality. In Proceedings of ITiCSE’17, Bologna, Italy, July 3–5, 2017, 15 pages. Results. There was no common denition of code quality among DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3059009.3081328 or within these groups. Quality was mostly described in terms of in- dicators that could measure an aspect of code quality. Among these indicators, readability was named most frequently by all groups. 1 INTRODUCTION ∗Working group co-leaders: Jürgen Börstler, Harald Störrle, and Daniel Toll The ability to develop high quality software is a key learning goal of computing programs [17, 23]. However, there are no univer- Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or sal measures to assess the quality of code and current standards classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for prot or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation are considered weak [6]. Dening the concept of “good” code is on the rst page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. therefore a challenge faced by many educators. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s). Programming textbooks typically emphasize the importance of ITiCSE’17, Bologna, Italy © 2017 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). 978-1-4503-4704-4/17/07...$15.00 quality, but rarely go beyond correctness and commenting in their DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3059009.3081328 treatment of quality. The value of thorough commenting beyond ITiCSE’17, July 3–5, 2017, Bologna, Italy J. Börstler et al. Develop materials Recruiting Interviews Transcribing Data handling Analysis • Interview guide interviewees • Part 1: Demographic interviews • Compile “survey • Transcription guide information and data” into one • Participant infor- experience document mation sheet • Part 2: Open question • Data cleaning • Interview script • Part 3: Follow-up questions Figure 1: Overview over the study process. “self-documenting code” is debatable though [13], and there is little items were at a high level. Their study did not show any signi- empirical evidence on the eects of comments on code quality [33]. cant eects of pedagogical code reviews on code quality, which is An early and strong focus on thorough commenting (and tools like quite interesting, since research on inspections in general shows a JavaDoc) might actually take time from more important quality positive impact on quality [3, 21]. issues. Quality aspects like understandability and maintainability Research shows that low level code features may aect code get little attention, although they are of signicant importance for quality. Butler et al., for example, showed that awed identier students’ professional careers. names are associated with low code quality [10]. A recent study Anything a professional software developer will do, be it devel- of 210 open-source Java projects regarding the eect of coding opment, testing or maintenance, will involve reading and under- conventions showed that size, comments and indentation aected standing code that someone else has developed. Eventually, their readability most [22]. Furthermore, recent research in program com- code will also need to be read and understood by others. It is there- prehension shows that misleading names are more problematic than fore important to better prepare students to write code that will be meaningless names [2], but that specic one-letter variables still easy to understand by others. can convey meaning [5]. It has also been shown that low-level struc- Some educators use static analysis tools such as Checkstyle1 or tural dierences aect program understanding, for example that FindBugs2 to support the assessment of programming assignments. for-loops are signicantly harder to understand than if-statements For example, Keuning et al. [18] recently showed that many student [1] and that “maintaining undisciplined annotations is more time programs in the (huge) Blackbox database contain quality issues as consuming and error prone” than maintaining disciplined ones [24]. reported by PMD3, and that students hardly ever x an issue, even There is also a large body of work on software quality measure- when they make use of analysis tools. These tools check a large ment [11], but there is little conclusive evidence on the relationship range of potential quality issues, but it is not clear which of these between the measurements and common software quality attributes tools are suitable or even appropriate in an educational context. [16]. Recent research actually questions the usefulness of many In this working group, we looked into the ways that students, common software measures, since they no longer have any predic- educators, and developers perceive code quality, in order to inves- tive power when controlled for program size [12]. tigate which quality aspects are seen as more or less important, Research also shows that educators do not have a suciently and which sources of information regarding code quality issues are accurate understanding of the programming mistakes that students used by these groups. actually make. A recent large-scale study showed that “educators’ estimates do not agree with one another or the student data” regard- 2 RELATED WORK ing which student mistakes were most common [9]. One conclusion In an ITiCSE’09 working group, we investigated the quality of from these results could be that many educators might base their object-oriented example programs from common introductory pro- teaching materials on invalid invalid assumptions about the issues gramming textbooks [7, 8]. Our results showed that the overall that students have. quality is not as high as one would expect, in particular regarding In our work, we therefore want to elicit rst-hand data from the exemplication of object-oriented properties. students, educators and developers to better understand their per- Stegeman et al. [30, 31] analyzed normative statements about ceptions of code quality. code quality from three popular texts on software development and compiled them into a set of 20 quality aspects. Furthermore, they 3 METHOD interviewed three teachers based on a programming assignment, Our overall goal was to investigate the dierences in perceptions using this set of quality aspects. The quality aspects and the results of code quality held by students, educators, and developers. from the interviews where then used to generate rubrics for the assessment of programming assignments. 3.1 Overall Process Inspired by code inspections [14, 21], Hundhausen et al. pro- posed pedagogical code reviews in which student teams review Since this study involved 10 researchers from dierent countries each others’ code using a checklist of “best practices” [15]. Their and institutions, we developed guides and instructions to ensure focus was on students’ attitudes toward quality and the checklist that the same procedures were followed at each
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Writing Quality Software
    Writing Quality Software About this white paper: This whitepaper was written by David C. Young, an employee of General Dynamics Information Technology (GDIT). Dr. Young is part of a team of GDIT employees who maintain, and support high performance computing systems at the Alabama Supercomputer Center (ASC). This was written in 2020. This paper is written for people who want to write good software, but don’t have a master’s degree in software architecture (or someone managing the project who does). Much of what is here would be covered in a software development practices class, often taught at the master’s degree level. Writing quality software is not only about the satisfaction of a job well done. It is also reflects on you and your professional reputation amongst your peers. In some cases writing quality software can be a factor in getting a job, losing a job, or even life or death. Furthermore, writing quality software should be considered an implicit requirement in every software development project. If the intended useful life of the software is many years, that is yet another reason to do a good job writing it. Introduction Consider this situation, which is all too common. You have written a really neat piece of software. You put it out on github, then tell your colleagues about it. Soon you are bombarded with a series of complaints from people who tried to install, and use your software. Some of those complaints might be; • It won’t install on their version of Linux. • They did the same thing you reported, but got a different answer.
    [Show full text]
  • Studying the Feasibility and Importance of Software Testing: an Analysis
    Dr. S.S.Riaz Ahamed / Internatinal Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Vol.1(3), 2009, 119-128 STUDYING THE FEASIBILITY AND IMPORTANCE OF SOFTWARE TESTING: AN ANALYSIS Dr.S.S.Riaz Ahamed Principal, Sathak Institute of Technology, Ramanathapuram,India. Email:[email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT Software testing is a critical element of software quality assurance and represents the ultimate review of specification, design and coding. Software testing is the process of testing the functionality and correctness of software by running it. Software testing is usually performed for one of two reasons: defect detection, and reliability estimation. The problem of applying software testing to defect detection is that software can only suggest the presence of flaws, not their absence (unless the testing is exhaustive). The problem of applying software testing to reliability estimation is that the input distribution used for selecting test cases may be flawed. The key to software testing is trying to find the modes of failure - something that requires exhaustively testing the code on all possible inputs. Software Testing, depending on the testing method employed, can be implemented at any time in the development process. Keywords: verification and validation (V & V) 1 INTRODUCTION Testing is a set of activities that could be planned ahead and conducted systematically. The main objective of testing is to find an error by executing a program. The objective of testing is to check whether the designed software meets the customer specification. The Testing should fulfill the following criteria: ¾ Test should begin at the module level and work “outward” toward the integration of the entire computer based system.
    [Show full text]
  • Reliability: Software Software Vs
    Reliability Theory SENG 521 Re lia bility th eory d evel oped apart f rom th e mainstream of probability and statistics, and Software Reliability & was usedid primar ily as a tool to h hlelp Software Quality nineteenth century maritime and life iifiblinsurance companies compute profitable rates Chapter 5: Overview of Software to charge their customers. Even today, the Reliability Engineering terms “failure rate” and “hazard rate” are often used interchangeably. Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Calgary Probability of survival of merchandize after B.H. Far （[email protected]） 1 http://www. enel.ucalgary . ca/People/far/Lectures/SENG521/ ooene MTTF is R e 0.37 From Engineering Statistics Handbook [email protected] 1 [email protected] 2 Reliability: Natural System Reliability: Hardware Natural system Hardware life life cycle. cycle. Aging effect: Useful life span Life span of a of a hardware natural system is system is limited limited by the by the age (wear maximum out) of the system. reproduction rate of the cells. Figure from Pressman’s book Figure from Pressman’s book [email protected] 3 [email protected] 4 Reliability: Software Software vs. Hardware So ftware life cyc le. Software reliability doesn’t decrease with Software systems time, i.e., software doesn’t wear out. are changed (updated) many Hardware faults are mostly physical faults, times during their e. g., fatigue. life cycle. Each update adds to Software faults are mostly design faults the structural which are harder to measure, model, detect deterioration of the and correct. software system. Figure from Pressman’s book [email protected] 5 [email protected] 6 Software vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Manual on Quality Assurance for Computer Software Related to the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants
    SIMPLIFIED SOFTWARE LIFE-CYCLE DIAGRAM FEASIBILITY STUDY PROJECT TIME I SOFTWARE P FUNCTIONAL I SPECIFICATION! SOFTWARE SYSTEM DESIGN DETAILED MODULES CECIFICATION MODULES DESIGN SOFTWARE INTEGRATION AND TESTING SYSTEM TESTING ••COMMISSIONING I AND HANDOVER | DECOMMISSION DESIGN DESIGN SPECIFICATION VERIFICATION OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE SOFTWARE LIFE-CYCLE PHASES TECHNICAL REPORTS SERIES No. 282 Manual on Quality Assurance for Computer Software Related to the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants f INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, VIENNA, 1988 MANUAL ON QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR COMPUTER SOFTWARE RELATED TO THE SAFETY OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS The following States are Members of the International Atomic Energy Agency: AFGHANISTAN GUATEMALA PARAGUAY ALBANIA HAITI PERU ALGERIA HOLY SEE PHILIPPINES ARGENTINA HUNGARY POLAND AUSTRALIA ICELAND PORTUGAL AUSTRIA INDIA QATAR BANGLADESH INDONESIA ROMANIA BELGIUM IRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF SAUDI ARABIA BOLIVIA IRAQ SENEGAL BRAZIL IRELAND SIERRA LEONE BULGARIA ISRAEL SINGAPORE BURMA ITALY SOUTH AFRICA BYELORUSSIAN SOVIET JAMAICA SPAIN SOCIALIST REPUBLIC JAPAN SRI LANKA CAMEROON JORDAN SUDAN CANADA KENYA SWEDEN CHILE KOREA, REPUBLIC OF SWITZERLAND CHINA KUWAIT SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC COLOMBIA LEBANON THAILAND COSTA RICA LIBERIA TUNISIA COTE D'lVOIRE LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRIYA TURKEY CUBA LIECHTENSTEIN UGANDA CYPRUS LUXEMBOURG UKRAINIAN SOVIET SOCIALIST CZECHOSLOVAKIA MADAGASCAR REPUBLIC DEMOCRATIC KAMPUCHEA MALAYSIA UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S MALI REPUBLICS REPUBLIC OF KOREA MAURITIUS UNITED ARAB
    [Show full text]
  • Software Quality Assurance Activities in Software Testing
    Software Quality Assurance Activities In Software Testing Tony never synopsizing any recidivist gazetting thus, is Brooke oncogenic and insolvable enough? Monogenous Chadd externalises, his disciplinarians denudes spring-clean Germanically. Spindliest Antoni never humors so edgewise or attain any shells lyingly. Each module performs one or two tasks, and thenpasses control to another module. Perform test automation for web application using Cucumber. Identify and describe safety software procurement methods, including supplier evaluation and source inspection processes. He previously worked at IBM SWS Toronto Lab. The information maintained in status accounting should enable the rebuild of any previous baseline. Beta Breakers supports all industry sectors. Thank you save time for all the lack of that includes test software assurance and must often. Focus on demonstrating pos next column containing algorithms, activities in software quality assurance testing activities of testing programs for their findings from his piece of skills, validate features to refresh teh page object. XML data sets to simulate production, using LLdap and ALTOVA. Schedule information should be expressed as absolute dates, as dates relative to either SCM or project milestones, or as a simple sequence of events. Its scope of software quality assurance and the correct email list all testshave been completely correct, in software quality assurance activities to be precisely known about its process on a familiarity level. These exercises are performed at every step along the way in the workshop. However, you have to balance driving out quality with production value. The second step is the validation of the computer system implementation against the computer system requirements. Software development tools, whose output becomes part of the program implementation and which can therefore introduce errors.
    [Show full text]
  • Renesas' Synergy Software Quality Handbook
    User’s Manual Synergy Software Quality Handbook Notice 1. Renesas Synergy™ Platform User’s Manual Synergy Software Software Quality Assurance All information contained in these materials, including products and product specifications, represents information on the product at the time of publication and is subject to change by Renesas Electronics Corp. without notice. Please review the latest information published by Renesas Electronics Corp. through various means, including the Renesas Electronics Corp. website (http://www.renesas.com). www.renesas.com Rev. 4.0 April 2019 Synergy Software Quality Handbook Descriptions of circuits, software and other related information in this document are provided only to illustrate the operation of semiconductor products and application examples. You are fully responsible for the incorporation or any other use of the circuits, software, and information in the design of your product or system. Renesas Electronics disclaims any and all liability for any losses and damages incurred by you or third parties arising from the use of these circuits, software, or information. 2. Renesas Electronics hereby expressly disclaims any warranties against and liability for infringement or any other disputes involving patents, copyrights, or other intellectual property rights of third parties, by or arising from the use of Renesas Electronics products or technical information described in this document, including but not limited to, the product data, drawing, chart, program, algorithm, application examples. 3. No license, express, implied or otherwise, is granted hereby under any patents, copyrights or other intellectual property rights of Renesas Electronics or others. 4. You shall not alter, modify, copy, or otherwise misappropriate any Renesas Electronics product, whether in whole or in part.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating and Improving Software Quality Using Text Analysis Techniques - a Mapping Study
    Evaluating and Improving Software Quality Using Text Analysis Techniques - A Mapping Study Faiz Shah, Dietmar Pfahl Institute of Computer Science, University of Tartu J. Liivi 2, Tartu 50490, Estonia {shah, dietmar.pfahl}@ut.ee Abstract: Improvement and evaluation of software quality is a recurring and crucial activ- ity in the software development life-cycle. During software development, soft- ware artifacts such as requirement documents, comments in source code, design documents, and change requests are created containing natural language text. For analyzing natural text, specialized text analysis techniques are available. However, a consolidated body of knowledge about research using text analysis techniques to improve and evaluate software quality still needs to be estab- lished. To contribute to the establishment of such a body of knowledge, we aimed at extracting relevant information from the scientific literature about data sources, research contributions, and the usage of text analysis techniques for the im- provement and evaluation of software quality. We conducted a mapping study by performing the following steps: define re- search questions, prepare search string and find relevant literature, apply screening process, classify, and extract data. Bug classification and bug severity assignment activities within defect manage- ment are frequently improved using the text analysis techniques of classifica- tion and concept extraction. Non-functional requirements elicitation activity of requirements engineering is mostly improved using the technique of concept extraction. The quality characteristic which is frequently evaluated for the prod- uct quality model is operability. The most commonly used data sources are: bug report, requirement documents, and software reviews. The dominant type of re- search contributions are solution proposals and validation research.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposing a Methodology to Evaluate Usability of E-Commerce Websites: QUEM Model
    International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887) Volume 52 – No. 6, August 2012 Proposing a Methodology to Evaluate Usability of E-Commerce Websites: QUEM Model Nasrin Dehbozorgi Shahram Jafari School of e-Learning, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering Shiraz University Shiraz University ABSTRACT e-commerce websites. For customizing these characteristics In this work we propose a methodology named QUEM specifically for e-commerce websites, a wide range of usability (Quantitative Usability Evaluation Model) for quantitative guidelines and checklists were studied, which were mainly usability evaluation of e-commerce websites. Many centered on works done by Nielsen, IBM and W3G guidelines. e-commerce websites lack user friendliness. The main factor Hence, in our model -which is named QUEM model- we that prevents these firms to conduct usability testing is the high propose a generic set of sub-characteristics for evaluation of e- costs and the need for usability experts. In this work, commerce websites. ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001 quality model was selected as a basis for defining usability characteristics of our model. Based on these In the following sections we will have an overview on existing standard usability characteristics a set of usability factors is quality evaluation methods and approaches. Then the research proposed specifically for evaluation of e-commerce websites. methodology will be discussed. Finally in the experimental The usability factors of QUEM model have been extracted from result section, the presented QUEM model is applied on two a wide range of usability guidelines and checklists. Since all of e-commerce systems and their usability is assessed and the usability factors do not have the same significance in the quantified into numerical values and compared with each other.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf: Software Testing
    Software Testing Gregory M. Kapfhammer Department of Computer Science Allegheny College [email protected] I shall not deny that the construction of these testing programs has been a major intellectual effort: to convince oneself that one has not overlooked “a relevant state” and to convince oneself that the testing programs generate them all is no simple matter. The encouraging thing is that (as far as we know!) it could be done. Edsger W. Dijkstra [Dijkstra, 1968] 1 Introduction When a program is implemented to provide a concrete representation of an algorithm, the developers of this program are naturally concerned with the correctness and performance of the implementation. Soft- ware engineers must ensure that their software systems achieve an appropriate level of quality. Software verification is the process of ensuring that a program meets its intended specification [Kaner et al., 1993]. One technique that can assist during the specification, design, and implementation of a software system is software verification through correctness proof. Software testing, or the process of assessing the func- tionality and correctness of a program through execution or analysis, is another alternative for verifying a software system. As noted by Bowen, Hinchley, and Geller, software testing can be appropriately used in conjunction with correctness proofs and other types of formal approaches in order to develop high quality software systems [Bowen and Hinchley, 1995, Geller, 1978]. Yet, it is also possible to use software testing techniques in isolation from program correctness proofs or other formal methods. Software testing is not a “silver bullet” that can guarantee the production of high quality software systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Beginners Guide to Software Testing
    Beginners Guide To Software Testing Beginners Guide To Software Testing - Padmini C Page 1 Beginners Guide To Software Testing Table of Contents: 1. Overview ........................................................................................................ 5 The Big Picture ............................................................................................... 5 What is software? Why should it be tested? ................................................. 6 What is Quality? How important is it? ........................................................... 6 What exactly does a software tester do? ...................................................... 7 What makes a good tester? ........................................................................... 8 Guidelines for new testers ............................................................................. 9 2. Introduction .................................................................................................. 11 Software Life Cycle ....................................................................................... 11 Various Life Cycle Models ............................................................................ 12 Software Testing Life Cycle .......................................................................... 13 What is a bug? Why do bugs occur? ............................................................ 15 Bug Life Cycle ............................................................................................... 16 Cost of fixing bugs .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Software Quality Understanding by Analysis of Abundant Data (SQUAAD)
    SQUAAD: Software Quality Understanding by Analysis of Abundant Data Sponsor: DASD(SE) By Mr. Pooyan Behnamghader 6th Annual SERC Doctoral Students Forum November 7, 2018 FHI 360 CONFERENCE CENTER 1825 Connecticut Avenue NW 8th Floor Washington, DC 20009 www.sercuarc.org SDSF 2018 November 7, 2018 Outline ➢ Why Is Studying Software Quality Evolution at Commit-Level Important for Systems Engineering? ➢ A Scalable and Efficient Approach for Compiling and Analyzing Commit History ○ Why Is Compilability Important? ○ Aims ○ Method ○ Research Questions ○ Data Collection ○ Results ○ Discussion of Benefits and Risks ➢ SQUAAD ○ Distribution ○ Deployments ➢ Key Takeaways Why Is Understanding Software Quality Evolution at Commit-Level Important? SLOC Code Smells Code Commit History Over a Period of 9 Years Why Is Compilability Important? ➢ Uncompilable code ○ Symptom of careless development. ○ Static bytecode analysis, and dynamic analysis. ○ Uncompilability in post-development analysis due to compilation environment issues. ➢ Compilation over commit history is a major challenge ○ Alexandru et al. (2017) declare the unavailability of the compiled versions ■ main unresolved source for the manual effort in software evolution analysis. ○ Tufano et al. (2017) mine the commit-history of 100 Apache projects ■ 62% of all commits are currently not compilable. Compilability and Commit-Level Mining Approaches Rev1 Rev2 Rev3 A Single Compile Error M1 M1 M1 Breaks the Build for the 1 1 Whole Software. 2 2 2 3 3 3 M2 M2 M2 4 4 4 9 9 5 5 5 ➢ Analyzing only impacted files M3 M3 M3 6 6 6 ○ Reduce the cost and complexity. 7 7 7 ○ Not suitable for compilation. 8 8 8 ➢ Analyzing the whole Legend software Compilable ○ Suitable for compilation.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing: First Step Towards Software Quality
    Quality in Statistics TESTING: FIRST STEP TOWARDS SOFTWARE QUALITY Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, intelligent direction and skillful execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives. (William A. Foster) Ioan Mihnea IACOB Managing Partner Qualitance QBS, Quality Consulting and Training Services Bachelor Degree in Computer Science from Polytechnic University, Bucharest, Romania CMMI 1.1. (Staged and Continuous) – course from Carnegie Mellon Software Institute E-mail: [email protected] Radu CONSTANTINESCU PhD Candidate, University Assistant Lecturer, Department of Economic Informatics University of Economics, Bucharest, Romania E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: This article’s purpose is to present the benefits of a mature approach to testing and quality activities in an engineering organization, make a case for more education with respect to software quality and testing, and propose a set of goals for quality and testing education. Key words: software testing; course curricula; quality assurance; testing tools 1. Introduction IT managers and professionals may have varied opinions about many software development principles, but most agree on one thing above all – the software you deliver must be accurate and reliable. And successful software development groups have long recognized that effective testing is essential to meeting this goal. In a recent survey of software development managers, the most often cited top-of- mind issue was software testing and quality assurance [Zeich05]1. Testing is not quality assurance—a brilliantly tested product that was badly conceived, incompetently designed and indifferently programmed will end up a well-tested, bad product. However, software testing has long been one of the core technical activities that can be used to improve the quality of software.
    [Show full text]