Download Testing Paper Presentation

Title: The Importance of Software Testing

Title: The Importance of Software Testing Types and Levels of Testing in Programming Testing is an important step in software development life cycle. The process of testing takes place at various stages of development in programming. This is a vital step in development life cycle because the process of testing helps to identify the mistakes and sends the program for correction. This process gets repeated at various stages until the final unit or program is found to be complete thus giving a total quality to the development process. The various levels and types of testing found in a software development life cycle are as follows: White Box Testing Black Box Testing Unit Testing Regression Testing Integration Testing Smoke Testing Alpha Testing Beta Testing Software testing has undergone an evolutionary process. The early stages of software testing were primitive and did not fully meet intended goals: better quality products through broader and deeper testing coverage, taking less time to test, and reducing quality-related costs .The current state-of-the-practice, which we refer to as Software Testing 3.0, is now emerging. Software Testing 3.0 offers the culture, methodologies, beliefs, and techniques that will enable software testing to truly deliver the full potential of quality engineering, test automation and global resources. This paper will trace the evolution of software testing through its first two phases, discussing the shortcomings or disconnects. It will then present Software Testing 3.0. Early stages of Evolution of Software Testing Software testing has already gone through at least two clearly identifiable phases. In Software Testing 1.0, software testing was misunderstood. It was an afterthought or adjunct to the development process left to less skilled, lower-paid individuals who actually viewed software testing as the entry point on a career path to becoming a software developer. There were few useful testing tools and methods for achieving a high degree of automation. Those that existed were expensive, complex, difficult to use, and ineffective at addressing productivity needs and concerns. In this phase, executive management was mostly disconnected from software testing assuming that somehow, it would get done. With Software Testing 2.0 came the recognition that software testing was and is an important part of the development process. Software testing was recognized as a valuable part of application development, and everybody started to test in earnest. With the high degree of acceptance across functional groups, came ownership issues issues of where testing fits organizationally, how it is budgeted for, and from where testing should receive its direction. There was also an explosion of available tools. These tools often further distracted the testing efforts, turning the process into one of tool selection without clear goals, architecture or direction. Within this phase, executive managements understanding of testing was still rudimentary as was their involvement. Both of these phases underperformed from the standpoint of organizations expectations for testing. There are some significant common threads throughout these first two phases that are at the root of our unmet expectations. The first is the lack of involvement and understanding on the part of senior management. Without a clear understanding of the importance of testing, its place within the development process and its valuable contributions to the organization, testing hopes can be dashed upon the rocky shores of misguided direction, funding, and expectations. The second thread that has caused significant problems is the emphasis on testing for testings sake, and tools and tool selection without any strategy for guidance. This is like building a road without destinations. You will end up with a road, but its ability to meet anyones needs is left entirely to chance. Similarly, testing and tool selection without a strategy will provide an organization with a software testing program, but the chances that it will provide better quality products through better testing coverage, in less time and at less expense, are very slim indeed. In essence, the first two phases yielded testing programs that were ill-equipped to actually meet the needs the organization for better software made faster and cheaper. These disconnects yield complaints that are all too common for 1.0/2.0 software testing programs, such as: download Testing Paper Presentation