verification and validation n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Verification and Validation PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Verification and Validation

Verification and Validation

183 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Verification and Validation

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Verification and Validation Reference: Software Engineering, Ian Sommerville, 6th edition, Chapter 19

  2. Objectives • To introduce software verification and validation and to discuss the distinction between them • To describe the difference between static and dynamic V & V • To describe the program inspection process and its role in V & V • To explain static analysis as a verification technique

  3. Verification vs. Validation • Verification: "Are we building the product right?" • The software should conform to its specification. • Validation: "Are we building the right product?" • The software should do what the user really requires.

  4. The V & V Process • Is a whole life-cycle process - V & V must be applied at each stage in the software process. • Example: Peer document reviews • Has two principal objectives • The discovery of defects in a system • The assessment of whether or not the system is usable in an operational situation

  5. V & V Goals • Verification and validation should establish confidence that the software is fit for its purpose. • This does NOT mean completely free of defects. • Rather, it must be good enough for its intended use. The type of use will determine the degree of confidence that is needed.

  6. V & V Confidence • Depends on the system’s purpose, user expectations, and marketing environment • System purpose • The level of confidence depends on how critical the software is to an organization (e.g., safety critical). • User expectations • Users may have low expectations of certain kinds of software • Marketing environment • Getting a product to market early may be more important than finding defects in the program

  7. Static vs. Dynamic V & V • Code and document inspections - Concerned with the analysis of the static system representation to discover problems(static v & v) • May be supplement by tool-based document and code analysis • Software testing - Concerned with exercising and observing product behavior (dynamic v & v) • The system is executed with test data and its operational behavior is observed

  8. Code Inspections (Static V & V) • Involves examining the source code with the aim of discovering anomalies and defects • Defects may be logical errors, anomalies in the code that might indicate an erroneous condition (e.g., an uninitialized variable), or non-compliance with coding standards. • Intended for defect detection,not correction • Very effective technique for discovering errors • Saves time and money – the earlier in the development process an error is found, the better

  9. Inspection Success • Many different defects may be discovered in a single inspection, whereas with testing one defect may mask another so that several executions/tests are required. • Inspections reuse domain and programming knowledge so reviewers are likely to have seen the types of errors that commonly arise.

  10. Inspections and Testing • Inspections and testing are complementary and not opposing verification techniques. • Inspections can check conformance with a specification, but not conformance with the customer’s real requirements. • Inspections cannot check non-functional characteristics such as performance, usability, etc.

  11. Inspection Preparation • A precise specification must be available. • Team members must be familiar with the organization’s standards. • Syntactically correct code must be available. • An error checklist should be prepared. • Management must accept that inspection will increase costs early in the software process.

  12. Ethics Question • A manager decides to use the reports of program inspections as an input to the staff appraisal process. These reports show who made and who discovered program errors. • Is this ethical management behavior? • Would it be ethical if the staff were informed in advance that this would happen? • What difference might it make in the inspection process?

  13. Inspection Procedure • The inspection procedure is planned. • A system overview is presented to the inspection team. • Code and associated documents are distributed to inspection team in advance. • Inspection takes place and discovered errors are noted. • Modifications are made to repair discovered errors. • Re-inspection may or may not be required.

  14. Inspection Teams • Made up of: • Author of the code being inspected • Inspector who finds errors, omissions, and inconsistencies • Reader who reads the code to the team • Moderator who chairs the meeting • Scribe who makes detailed notes regarding errors • Roles may vary from these (e.g., Reader). • Multiple roles may be taken on by the same member.

  15. Inspection Checklist • Checklist of common errors should be used to drive the inspection • Error checklist is programming language dependent • The “weaker” the language type checking, the larger the checklist (e.g., C vs. Java) • Examples: variable initializations, constant naming, loop termination, array bounds, etc.

  16. Inspection checks

  17. Inspection Rate Measurements at IBM by M. E. Fagan: • 500 statements/hour during overview • 125 source statements/hour during individual preparation • 90-125 statements/hour can be inspected • Inspection is, therefore, an expensive process • Inspecting 500 lines costs about 40 person-hours effort

  18. Automated Static Analysis • Static analyzers are software tools for source text processing. • They parse the program text and try to discover potentially erroneous conditions. • Very effective as an aid to inspections. A supplement to, but not a replacement for, inspections.

  19. Static Analysis Checks

  20. Stages of Static Analysis • Control flow analysis. Checks for loops with multiple exit or entry points, finds unreachable code, etc. • Data use analysis. Detects uninitialized variables, variables assigned twice without an intervening use, variables that are declared but never used, etc. • Interface analysis. Checks the consistency of procedure declarations and their use

  21. Stages of Static Analysis (con’t) • Information flow analysis. Identifies the dependencies of output variables. Does not detect anomalies itself but highlights information for code inspection or review • Path analysis. Identifies paths through the program and sets out the statements executed in that path. Potentially useful in the inspection and testing processes. • Both of these stages generate vast amounts of information. Must be used with care.

  22. 138% more lint_ex.c #include <stdio.h> printarray (Anarray) int Anarray; { printf(“%d”,Anarray); } main () { int Anarray[5]; int i; char c; printarray (Anarray, i, c); printarray (Anarray) ; } 139% cc lint_ex.c 140% lint lint_ex.c lint_ex.c(10): warning: c may be used before set lint_ex.c(10): warning: i may be used before set printarray: variable # of args. lint_ex.c(4) :: lint_ex.c(10) printarray, arg. 1 used inconsistently lint_ex.c(4) :: lint_ex.c(10) printarray, arg. 1 used inconsistently lint_ex.c(4) :: lint_ex.c(11) printf returns value which is always ignored LINT static analysis