alican/testexperiment
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

finalize

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Ali Can Zeybek
2024-12-06 23:27:10 +03:00
parent 297ab4b7c8
commit f9d46f3e39
3 changed files with 27 additions and 2 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
report/report.aux
View File

@@ -28,9 +28,9 @@
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {\mbox {II-C}}Boundary Value Testing}{1}{subsection.2.3}\protected@file@percent }
\@writefile{lot}{\contentsline {table}{\numberline {IV}{\ignorespaces Boundary values for input parameters.\relax }}{1}{table.caption.4}\protected@file@percent }
\newlabel{boundaries}{{IV}{1}{Boundary values for input parameters.\relax }{table.caption.4}{}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {\mbox {II-C}1}Test Cases}{1}{subsubsection.2.3.1}\protected@file@percent }
\@writefile{lot}{\contentsline {table}{\numberline {V}{\ignorespaces Test cases generated for boundary value testing\relax }}{2}{table.caption.5}\protected@file@percent }
\newlabel{tab:test_cases}{{V}{2}{Test cases generated for boundary value testing\relax }{table.caption.5}{}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {\mbox {II-C}1}Test Cases}{2}{subsubsection.2.3.1}\protected@file@percent }
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {III}Experiment 2}{2}{section.3}\protected@file@percent }
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {\mbox {III-A}}Decision Table Testing}{2}{subsection.3.1}\protected@file@percent }
\@writefile{lot}{\contentsline {table}{\numberline {VI}{\ignorespaces Test cases generated for for decision table testing\relax }}{2}{table.caption.6}\protected@file@percent }

BIN
report/report.pdf
View File

Binary file not shown.

27
report/report.tex
View File

@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
% Introduction Section
\section{Introduction}
In this report we implemented and tested two given programs. Decision table testing, equivalence testing and boundary testing done for each and compared a) different testing techniques for same application b) same testing technique for different programs.
In this report we implemented and tested two given programs. Decision table testing, equivalence testing and boundary testing done for each and compared both programs with each other in respect to 3 test techniques.
% Experiment 1 Section
\section{Experiment 1}
@@ -267,6 +267,31 @@ Boundary Values Considered:
\section{Conclusion}
In Project 2 (Access Control scenario), the decision conditions were related to employee roles, special authorization, and time constraints. In contrast, Project 1 focuses on numerical thresholds (Purchase Amount, Number of Items) and cost calculations. While Project 2 tested boolean logic and access permissions, Project 1 tests arithmetic computations and fee structures.
Test Complexity:
\begin{itemize}
\item Project 2: More logical/boolean conditions.
\item Project 1: More arithmetic and boundary-value checks.
\end{itemize}
Number of Test Cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item Project 2: Focused on covering all logic paths (e.g., 8 decision table tests).
\item Project 1: Has a straightforward table with distinct numeric thresholds, potentially leading to more test cases because of multiple numeric partitions and delivery speed options (12 scenarios as outlined above).
\end{itemize}
Coverage Strategy:
\begin{itemize}
\item Project 2: Ensured every logical combination was tested.
\item Project 1: Ensures each numerical range and delivery option is covered, testing all formula variations.
\end{itemize}
\onecolumn
\section*{Additional Resources}