User idhrees (firstname.lastname@example.org) posted:
We are looking for a test coverage tool, for applications
written in coolgen( such as sofIns, Expetest for MVS). Suggestions
Re: Test Coverage..
User Bob Calco (email@example.com) posted:
When you say "test coverage," what do you mean? Do you mean code coverage or
If you mean "code coverage" we at CorTechs have a product, ProbeRunner, that
is designed to provide "white box" test support in an automated test
framework, such that you can perform code coverage, memory leak analysis,
function tracing and function profiling of C and C++ applications "out of
the box" (and develop custom probe libraries for those "hard to reach"
places in your application's code), while running black box WinRunner
scripts for functional testing. For example, you can use ProbeRunner probes
to stub functions and deliberately return bad values (a technique known as
fault injection), in order to exercise otherwise unexercised exception
handling code. This is an issue with COOL:Gen generated applications, which
generate a lot of canned exception handling code that never actually gets
tested and is for the most part impossible to test, without some "inside"
means to create the faults that would exercise that code.
The best part is that ProbeRunner is built from the ground up to work
directly with WinRunner and TestDirector, so that you can in effect blend
"white box" and "black box" test techniques in special-purpose "gray box"
test cases. ProbeRunner empowers testers with debugging technology that is
light years ahead of anything else on the market, making it possible for
testers to help developers solve problems more quickly by providing them
with a means to perform a lot of the forensics during testing.
You can also improve process metrics with ProbeRunner. For instance,
wouldn't it be helpful to know what percentage of code coverage your
WinRunner scripts provide versus your manual tests? That kind of thing. More
than anything, though, ProbeRunner's value lies in the fact that it makes
possible types of testing that have otherwise been impossible. I gave the
example of fault injection above, but there is another: Requirements Based
One of the issues with implementing real RBT is the fact that the
cause-effect graphs that you develop to model your requirements and generate
test cases based on them is the fact that some of the "nodes" in the graph
are simply not testable using traditional black box technology because they
are not, so to speak, "observable" at the layer of the GUI. ProbeRunner
gives you a means to place probes on those "invisible" chunks of logic in
your cause-effect graph, thus enabling you to test *all* the requirements
rather than resort to suppressing test cases merely because you have no
means to verify them.
So, if by test coverage you mean requirements coverage, here too ProbeRunner
may be able to help, in conjunction with some other tool that helps you
generate test cases based on requirements. One such tool that does precisely
this is Caliber RBT, currently owned (to my knowledge) by StarBase. It's
pretty cool and the latest version has a Visio interface so that you don't
have to mess with any prolog-esque code to generate your test cases, you can
create your cause-effect graphs visually.
Anyway, lemme know if ProbeRunner sounds interesting.
Senior Software Engineer
Re: Test Coverage..
User PA (firstname.lastname@example.org) posted:
Sorry, I can't help you with the coolgen coverage but you are one of the fi=
rst I have heard mention Expetest for test coverage for MVS apps. Where did=
you hear of this one?
You can take this off-line and email me at email@example.com, if you wi=
sh to reply.
----- Original Message -----=20
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 8:35 PM
Subject: [winrunner] Test Coverage..
We are looking for a test coverage tool, for applications=20
written in coolgen( such as sofIns, Expetest for MVS). Suggestions=20
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20