Manual Testing Interview Questions and Answers

What makes a good test engineer?

A good test engineer has a 'test to break' attitude, an ability to take
the point of view of the customer, a strong desire for quality, and an
attention to detail. Tact and diplomacy are useful in maintaining a
cooperative relationship with developers, and an ability to
communicate with both technical (developers) and non-technical
(customers, management) people is useful. Previous software
development experience can be helpful as it provides a deeper
understanding of the software development process, gives the tester
an appreciation for the developers' point of view, and reduce the
learning curve in automated test tool programming. Judgment skills
are needed to assess high-risk areas of an application on which to
focus testing efforts when time is limited.

What makes a good Software QA engineer?

The same qualities a good tester has are useful for a QA engineer.
Additionally, they must be able to understand the entire software
development process and how it can fit into the business approach
and goals of the organization. Communication skills and the ability to
understand various sides of issues are important. In organizations in
the early stages of implementing QA processes, patience and
diplomacy are especially needed. An ability to find problems as well as
to see 'what's missing' is important for inspections and reviews.

What makes a good QA or Test manager?

A good QA, test, or QA/Test(combined) manager should:
• be familiar with the software development process
• be able to maintain enthusiasm of their team and promote a positive
atmosphere, despite
• what is a somewhat 'negative' process (e.g., looking for or preventing
problems)
• be able to promote teamwork to increase productivity
• be able to promote cooperation between software, test, and QA
engineers
• have the diplomatic skills needed to promote improvements in QA
processes
• have the ability to withstand pressures and say 'no' to other
managers when quality is insufficient or QA processes are not being
adhered to
• have people judgement skills for hiring and keeping skilled personnel

• be able to communicate with technical and non-technical people,

engineers, managers, and customers.
• be able to run meetings and keep them focused
What's the role of documentation in QA?
Critical. (Note that documentation can be electronic, not necessarily
paper.) QA practices should be documented such that they are
repeatable. Specifications, designs, business rules, inspection reports,
configurations, code changes, test plans, test cases, bug reports, user
manuals, etc. should all be documented. There should ideally be a
system for easily finding and obtaining documents and determining
what documentation will have a particular piece of information.
Change management for documentation should be used if possible.

What's the big deal about 'requirements'?

One of the most reliable methods of insuring problems, or failure, in a

complex software project is to have poorly documented requirements
specifications. Requirements are the details describing an
application's externally-perceived functionality and properties.
Requirements should be clear, complete, reasonably detailed,
cohesive, attainable, and testable. A non-testable requirement would
be, for example, 'user-friendly' (too subjective). A testable requirement
would be something like 'the user must enter their previously-
assigned password to access the application'. Determining and
organizing requirements details in a useful and efficient way can be a
difficult effort; different methods are available depending on the
particular project. Many books are available that describe various
approaches to this task. (See the Bookstore section's 'Software
Requirements Engineering' category for books on Software
Requirements.)
Care should be taken to involve ALL of a project's significant
'customers' in the requirements process. 'Customers' could be in-
house personnel or out, and could include end-users, customer
acceptance testers, customer contract officers, customer management,
future software maintenance engineers, salespeople, etc. Anyone who
could later derail the project if their expectations aren't met should be
included if possible.
Organizations vary considerably in their handling of requirements
specifications. Ideally, the requirements are spelled out in a document
with statements such as 'The product shall.....'. 'Design' specifications
should not be confused with 'requirements'; design specifications
should be traceable back to the requirements.
In some organizations requirements may end up in high level project
plans, functional specification documents, in design documents, or in
other documents at various levels of detail. No matter what they are
called, some type of documentation with detailed requirements will be
needed by testers in order to properly plan and execute tests. Without
such documentation, there will be no clear-cut way to determine if a
software application is performing correctly.
'Agile' methods such as XP use methods requiring close interaction
and cooperation between programmers and customers/end-users to
iteratively develop requirements. The programmer uses 'Test first'
development to first create automated unit testing code, which
essentially embodies the requirements.

What steps are needed to develop and run software tests?

The following are some of the steps to consider:
• Obtain requirements, functional design, and internal design
specifications and other necessary documents
• Obtain budget and schedule requirements
• Determine project-related personnel and their responsibilities,
reporting requirements, required standards and processes (such as
release processes, change processes, etc.)
• Identify application's higher-risk aspects, set priorities, and
determine scope and limitations of tests
• Determine test approaches and methods - unit, integration,
functional, system, load, usability tests, etc.
• Determine test environment requirements (hardware, software,
communications, etc.)
• Determine testware requirements (record/playback tools, coverage
analyzers, test tracking, problem/bug tracking, etc.)
• Determine test input data requirements
• Identify tasks, those responsible for tasks, and labor requirements
• Set schedule estimates, timelines, milestones
• Determine input equivalence classes, boundary value analyses, error
classes
• Prepare test plan document and have needed reviews/approvals
• Write test cases
• Have needed reviews/inspections/approvals of test cases
• Prepare test environment and testware, obtain needed user
manuals/reference documents/configuration guides/installation
guides, set up test tracking processes, set up logging and archiving
processes, set up or obtain test input data
• Obtain and install software releases
• Perform tests
• Evaluate and report results
• Track problems/bugs and fixes
• Retest as needed
• Maintain and update test plans, test cases, test environment, and
testware through life cycle
What's a 'test plan'?
A software project test plan is a document that describes the
objectives, scope, approach, and focus of a software testing effort. The
process of preparing a test plan is a useful way to think through the
efforts needed to validate the acceptability of a software product. The
completed document will help people outside the test group
understand the 'why' and 'how' of product validation. It should be
thorough enough to be useful but not so thorough that no one outside
the test group will read it. The following are some of the items that
might be included in a test plan, depending on the particular project:
• Title
• Identification of software including version/release numbers
• Revision history of document including authors, dates, approvals
• Table of Contents
• Purpose of document, intended audience
• Objective of testing effort
• Software product overview
• Relevant related document list, such as requirements, design
documents, other test plans, etc.
• Relevant standards or legal requirements
• Traceability requirements
• Relevant naming conventions and identifier conventions
• Overall software project organization and personnel/contact-
info/responsibilties
• Test organization and personnel/contact-info/responsibilities
• Assumptions and dependencies
• Project risk analysis
• Testing priorities and focus
• Scope and limitations of testing
• Test outline - a decomposition of the test approach by test type,
feature, functionality, process, system, module, etc. as applicable
• Outline of data input equivalence classes, boundary value analysis,
error classes
• Test environment - hardware, operating systems, other required
software, data configurations, interfaces to other systems
• Test environment validity analysis - differences between the test and
production systems and their impact on test validity.
• Test environment setup and configuration issues
• Software migration processes
• Software CM processes
• Test data setup requirements
• Database setup requirements
• Outline of system-logging/error-logging/other capabilities, and tools
such as screen capture software, that will be used to help describe
and report bugs
• Discussion of any specialized software or hardware tools that will be
used by testers to help track the cause or source of bugs
• Test automation - justification and overview
• Test tools to be used, including versions, patches, etc.
• Test script/test code maintenance processes and version control
• Problem tracking and resolution - tools and processes
• Project test metrics to be used
• Reporting requirements and testing deliverables
• Software entrance and exit criteria
• Initial sanity testing period and criteria
• Test suspension and restart criteria
• Personnel allocation
• Personnel pre-training needs
• Test site/location
• Outside test organizations to be utilized and their purpose,
responsibilties, deliverables, contact persons, and coordination issues
• Relevant proprietary, classified, security, and licensing issues.
• Open issues
• Appendix - glossary, acronyms, etc.

What's a 'test case'?

• A test case is a document that describes an input, action, or event

and an expected response, to determine if a feature of an application
is working correctly. A test case should contain particulars such as
test case identifier, test case name, objective, test conditions/setup,
input data requirements, steps, and expected results.
• Note that the process of developing test cases can help find problems
in the requirements or design of an application, since it requires
completely thinking through the operation of the application. For this
reason, it's useful to prepare test cases early in the development cycle
if possible.

What should be done after a bug is found?

The bug needs to be communicated and assigned to developers that
can fix it. After the problem is resolved, fixes should be re-tested, and
determinations made regarding requirements for regression testing to
check that fixes didn't create problems elsewhere. If a problem-
tracking system is in place, it should encapsulate these processes. A
variety of commercial problem-tracking/management software tools
are available (see the 'Tools' section for web resources with listings of
such tools). The following are items to consider in the tracking
process:
• Complete information such that developers can understand the bug,
get an idea of it's severity, and reproduce it if necessary.
• Bug identifier (number, ID, etc.)
• Current bug status (e.g., 'Released for Retest', 'New', etc.)
• The application name or identifier and version
• The function, module, feature, object, screen, etc. where the bug
occurred
• Environment specifics, system, platform, relevant hardware specifics

• Test case name/number/identifier

• One-line bug description
• Full bug description
• Description of steps needed to reproduce the bug if not covered by a
test case or if the developer doesn't have easy access to the test
case/test script/test tool
• Names and/or descriptions of file/data/messages/etc. used in test
• File excerpts/error messages/log file excerpts/screen shots/test tool
logs that would be helpful in finding the cause of the problem
• Severity estimate (a 5-level range such as 1-5 or 'critical'-to-'low' is
common)
• Was the bug reproducible?
• Tester name
• Test date
• Bug reporting date
• Name of developer/group/organization the problem is assigned to
• Description of problem cause
• Description of fix
• Code section/file/module/class/method that was fixed
• Date of fix
• Application version that contains the fix
• Tester responsible for retest
• Retest date
• Retest results
• Regression testing requirements
• Tester responsible for regression tests
• Regression testing results
A reporting or tracking process should enable notification of
appropriate personnel at various stages. For instance, testers need to
know when retesting is needed, developers need to know when bugs
are found and how to get the needed information, and
reporting/summary capabilities are needed for managers
What is 'configuration management'?
Configuration management covers the processes used to control,
coordinate, and track: code, requirements, documentation, problems,
change requests, designs, tools/compilers/libraries/patches, changes
made to them, and who makes the changes. (See the 'Tools' section for
web resources with listings of configuration management tools. Also
see the Bookstore section's 'Configuration Management' category for
useful books with more information.)

What if the software is so buggy it can't really be tested at all?

The best bet in this situation is for the testers to go through the
process of reporting whatever bugs or blocking-type problems initially
show up, with the focus being on critical bugs. Since this type of
problem can severely affect schedules, and indicates deeper problems
in the software development process (such as insufficient unit testing
or insufficient integration testing, poor design, improper build or
release procedures, etc.) managers should be notified, and provided
with some documentation as evidence of the problem.

How can it be known when to stop testing?

This can be difficult to determine. Many modern software applications
are so complex, and run in such an interdependent environment, that
complete testing can never be done. Common factors in deciding when
to stop are:
• Deadlines (release deadlines, testing deadlines, etc.)
• Test cases completed with certain percentage passed
• Test budget depleted
• Coverage of code/functionality/requirements reaches a specified
point
• Bug rate falls below a certain level
• Beta or alpha testing period ends

What if there isn't enough time for thorough testing?

Use risk analysis to determine where testing should be focused.
Since it's rarely possible to test every possible aspect of an application,
every possible combination of events, every dependency, or everything
that could go wrong, risk analysis is appropriate to most software
development projects. This requires judgement skills, common sense,
and experience. (If warranted, formal methods are also available.)
Considerations can include:
• Which functionality is most important to the project's intended
purpose?
• Which functionality is most visible to the user?
• Which functionality has the largest safety impact?
• Which functionality has the largest financial impact on users?
• Which aspects of the application are most important to the
customer?
• Which aspects of the application can be tested early in the
development cycle?
• Which parts of the code are most complex, and thus most subject to
errors?
• Which parts of the application were developed in rush or panic
mode?
• Which aspects of similar/related previous projects caused problems?

• Which aspects of similar/related previous projects had large

maintenance expenses?
• Which parts of the requirements and design are unclear or poorly
thought out?
• What do the developers think are the highest-risk aspects of the
application?
• What kinds of problems would cause the worst publicity?
• What kinds of problems would cause the most customer service
complaints?
• What kinds of tests could easily cover multiple functionalities?
• Which tests will have the best high-risk-coverage to time-required
ratio?

What if the project isn't big enough to justify extensive testing?

Consider the impact of project errors, not the size of the project.
However, if extensive testing is still not justified, risk analysis is again
needed and the same considerations as described previously in 'What
if there isn't enough time for thorough testing?' apply. The tester
might then do ad hoc testing, or write up a limited test plan based on
the risk analysis.

What can be done if requirements are changing continuously?

A common problem and a major headache.
• Work with the project's stakeholders early on to understand how
requirements might change so that alternate test plans and strategies
can be worked out in advance, if possible.
• It's helpful if the application's initial design allows for some
adaptability so that later changes do not require redoing the
application from scratch.
• If the code is well-commented and well-documented this makes
changes easier for the developers.
• Use rapid prototyping whenever possible to help customers feel sure
of their requirements and minimize changes.
• The project's initial schedule should allow for some extra time
commensurate with the possibility of changes.
• Try to move new requirements to a 'Phase 2' version of an
application, while using the original requirements for the 'Phase 1'
version.
• Negotiate to allow only easily-implemented new requirements into
the project, while moving more difficult new requirements into future
versions of the application.
• Be sure that customers and management understand the scheduling
impacts, inherent risks, and costs of significant requirements
changes. Then let management or the customers (not the developers
or testers) decide if the changes are warranted - after all, that's their
job.
• Balance the effort put into setting up automated testing with the
expected effort required to re-do them to deal with changes.
• Try to design some flexibility into automated test scripts.
• Focus initial automated testing on application aspects that are most
likely to remain unchanged.
• Devote appropriate effort to risk analysis of changes to minimize
regression testing needs.
• Design some flexibility into test cases (this is not easily done; the
best bet might be to minimize the detail in the test cases, or set up
only higher-level generic-type test plans)
• Focus less on detailed test plans and test cases and more on ad hoc
testing (with an understanding of the added risk that this entails).

What if the application has functionality that wasn't in the

requirements?
It may take serious effort to determine if an application has significant
unexpected or hidden functionality, and it would indicate deeper
problems in the software development process. If the functionality isn't
necessary to the purpose of the application, it should be removed, as it
may have unknown impacts or dependencies that were not taken into
account by the designer or the customer. If not removed, design
information will be needed to determine added testing needs or
regression testing needs. Management should be made aware of any
significant added risks as a result of the unexpected functionality. If
the functionality only effects areas such as minor improvements in the
user interface, for example, it may not be a significant risk.

How can Software QA processes be implemented without stifling

productivity?
By implementing QA processes slowly over time, using consensus to
reach agreement on processes, and adjusting and experimenting as an
organization grows and matures, productivity will be improved instead
of stifled. Problem prevention will lessen the need for problem
detection, panics and burn-out will decrease, and there will be
improved focus and less wasted effort. At the same time, attempts
should be made to keep processes simple and efficient, minimize
paperwork, promote computer-based processes and automated
tracking and reporting, minimize time required in meetings, and
promote training as part of the QA process. However, no one -
especially talented technical types - likes rules or bureacracy, and in
the short run things may slow down a bit. A typical scenario would be
that more days of planning and development will be needed, but less
time will be required for late-night bug-fixing and calming of irate
customers.

What if an organization is growing so fast that fixed QA processes

are impossible?
This is a common problem in the software industry, especially in new
technology areas. There is no easy solution in this situation, other
than:
• Hire good people
• Management should 'ruthlessly prioritize' quality issues and
maintain focus on the customer
• Everyone in the organization should be clear on what 'quality' means
to the customer

How does a client/server environment affect testing?

Client/server applications can be quite complex due to the multiple
dependencies among clients, data communications, hardware, and
servers. Thus testing requirements can be extensive. When time is
limited (as it usually is) the focus should be on integration and system
testing. Additionally, load/stress/performance testing may be useful
in determining client/server application limitations and capabilities.
There are commercial tools to assist with such testing. (See the 'Tools'
section for web resources with listings that include these kinds of test
tools.)

How can World Wide Web sites be tested?

Web sites are essentially client/server applications - with web servers
and 'browser' clients. Consideration should be given to the
interactions between html pages, TCP/IP communications, Internet
connections, firewalls, applications that run in web pages (such as
applets, javascript, plug-in applications), and applications that run on
the server side (such as cgi scripts, database interfaces, logging
applications, dynamic page generators, asp, etc.). Additionally, there
are a wide variety of servers and browsers, various versions of each,
small but sometimes significant differences between them, variations
in connection speeds, rapidly changing technologies, and multiple
standards and protocols. The end result is that testing for web sites
can become a major ongoing effort. Other considerations might
include:
• What are the expected loads on the server (e.g., number of hits per
unit time?), and what kind of performance is required under such
loads (such as web server response time, database query response
times). What kinds of tools will be needed for performance testing
(such as web load testing tools, other tools already in house that can
be adapted, web robot downloading tools, etc.)?
• Who is the target audience? What kind of browsers will they be
using? What kind of connection speeds will they by using? Are they
intra- organization (thus with likely high connection speeds and
similar browsers) or Internet-wide (thus with a wide variety of
connection speeds and browser types)?
• What kind of performance is expected on the client side (e.g., how
fast should pages appear, how fast should animations, applets, etc.
load and run)?
• Will down time for server and content maintenance/upgrades be
allowed? how much?
• What kinds of security (firewalls, encryptions, passwords, etc.) will
be required and what is it expected to do? How can it be tested?
• How reliable are the site's Internet connections required to be? And
how does that affect backup system or redundant connection
requirements and testing?
• What processes will be required to manage updates to the web site's
content, and what are the requirements for maintaining, tracking, and
controlling page content, graphics, links, etc.?
• Which HTML specification will be adhered to? How strictly? What
variations will be allowed for targeted browsers?
• Will there be any standards or requirements for page appearance
and/or graphics throughout a site or parts of a site??
• How will internal and external links be validated and updated? how
often?
• Can testing be done on the production system, or will a separate test
system be required? How are browser caching, variations in browser
option settings, dial-up connection variabilities, and real-world
internet 'traffic congestion' problems to be accounted for in testing?
• How extensive or customized are the server logging and reporting
requirements; are they considered an integral part of the system and
do they require testing?
• How are cgi programs, applets, javascripts, ActiveX components, etc.
to be maintained, tracked, controlled, and tested?
Some sources of site security information include the Usenet
newsgroup 'comp.security.announce' and links concerning web site
security in the 'Other Resources' section.
Some usability guidelines to consider - these are subjective and may
or may not apply to a given situation (Note: more information on
usability testing issues can be found in articles about web site
usability in the 'Other Resources' section):
• Pages should be 3-5 screens max unless content is tightly focused
on a single topic. If larger, provide internal links within the page.
• The page layouts and design elements should be consistent
throughout a site, so that it's clear to the user that they're still within
a site.
• Pages should be as browser-independent as possible, or pages
should be provided or generated based on the browser-type.
• All pages should have links external to the page; there should be no
dead-end pages.
• The page owner, revision date, and a link to a contact person or
organization should be included on each page.
Many new web site test tools have appeared in the recent years and
more than 280 of them are listed in the 'Web Test Tools' section.

How is testing affected by object-oriented designs?

Well-engineered object-oriented design can make it easier to trace
from code to internal design to functional design to requirements.
While there will be little affect on black box testing (where an
understanding of the internal design of the application is
unnecessary), white-box testing can be oriented to the application's
objects. If the application was well-designed this can simplify test
design.

What is Extreme Programming and what's it got to do with

testing?
Extreme Programming (XP) is a software development approach for
small teams on risk-prone projects with unstable requirements. It was
created by Kent Beck who described the approach in his book
'Extreme Programming Explained' (See the Softwareqatest.com Books
page.). Testing ('extreme testing') is a core aspect of Extreme
Programming. Programmers are expected to write unit and functional
test code first - before the application is developed. Test code is under
source control along with the rest of the code. Customers are expected
to be an integral part of the project team and to help develope
scenarios for acceptance/black box testing. Acceptance tests are
preferably automated, and are modified and rerun for each of the
frequent development iterations. QA and test personnel are also
required to be an integral part of the project team. Detailed
requirements documentation is not used, and frequent re-scheduling,
re-estimating, and re-prioritizing is expected. For more info see the
XP-related listings in the Softwareqatest.com 'Other Resources'
section.

What is 'Software Quality Assurance'?

Software QA involves the entire software development PROCESS -
monitoring and improving the process, making sure that any agreed-
upon standards and procedures are followed, and ensuring that
problems are found and dealt with. It is oriented to 'prevention'. (See
the Bookstore section's 'Software QA' category for a list of useful books
on Software Quality Assurance.)

What is 'Software Testing'?

Testing involves operation of a system or application under controlled
conditions and evaluating the results (eg, 'if the user is in interface A
of the application while using hardware B, and does C, then D should
happen'). The controlled conditions should include both normal and
abnormal conditions. Testing should intentionally attempt to make
things go wrong to determine if things happen when they shouldn't or
things don't happen when they should. It is oriented to 'detection'.
(See the Bookstore section's 'Software Testing' category for a list of
useful books on Software Testing.)
• Organizations vary considerably in how they assign responsibility for
QA and testing. Sometimes they're the combined responsibility of one
group or individual. Also common are project teams that include a mix
of testers and developers who work closely together, with overall QA
processes monitored by project managers. It will depend on what best
fits an organization's size and business structure.

What are some recent major computer system failures caused by

software bugs?
• A major U.S. retailer was reportedly hit with a large government fine
in October of 2003 due to web site errors that enabled customers to
view one anothers' online orders.
• News stories in the fall of 2003 stated that a manufacturing
company recalled all their transportation products in order to fix a
software problem causing instability in certain circumstances. The
company found and reported the bug itself and initiated the recall
procedure in which a software upgrade fixed the problems.
• In August of 2003 a U.S. court ruled that a lawsuit against a large
online brokerage company could proceed; the lawsuit reportedly
involved claims that the company was not fixing system problems that
sometimes resulted in failed stock trades, based on the experiences of
4 plaintiffs during an 8-month period. A previous lower court's ruling
that "...six miscues out of more than 400 trades does not indicate
negligence." was invalidated.
• In April of 2003 it was announced that the largest student loan
company in the U.S. made a software error in calculating the monthly
payments on 800,000 loans. Although borrowers were to be notified of
an increase in their required payments, the company will still
reportedly lose $8 million in interest. The error was uncovered when
borrowers began reporting inconsistencies in their bills.
• News reports in February of 2003 revealed that the U.S. Treasury
Department mailed 50,000 Social Security checks without any
beneficiary names. A spokesperson indicated that the missing names
were due to an error in a software change. Replacement checks were
subsequently mailed out with the problem corrected, and recipients
were then able to cash their Social Security checks.
• In March of 2002 it was reported that software bugs in Britain's
national tax system resulted in more than 100,000 erroneous tax
overcharges. The problem was partly attibuted to the difficulty of
testing the integration of multiple systems.
• A newspaper columnist reported in July 2001 that a serious flaw
was found in off-the-shelf software that had long been used in systems
for tracking certain U.S. nuclear materials. The same software had
been recently donated to another country to be used in tracking their
own nuclear materials, and it was not until scientists in that country
discovered the problem, and shared the information, that U.S. officials
became aware of the problems.
• According to newspaper stories in mid-2001, a major systems
development contractor was fired and sued over problems with a large
retirement plan management system. According to the reports, the
client claimed that system deliveries were late, the software had
excessive defects, and it caused other systems to crash.
• In January of 2001 newspapers reported that a major European
railroad was hit by the aftereffects of the Y2K bug. The company found
that many of their newer trains would not run due to their inability to
recognize the date '31/12/2000'; the trains were started by altering
the control system's date settings.
• News reports in September of 2000 told of a software vendor settling
a lawsuit with a large mortgage lender; the vendor had reportedly
delivered an online mortgage processing system that did not meet
specifications, was delivered late, and didn't work.
• In early 2000, major problems were reported with a new computer
system in a large suburban U.S. public school district with 100,000+
students; problems included 10,000 erroneous report cards and
students left stranded by failed class registration systems; the
district's CIO was fired. The school district decided to reinstate it's
original 25-year old system for at least a year until the bugs were
worked out of the new system by the software vendors.
• In October of 1999 the $125 million NASA Mars Climate Orbiter
spacecraft was believed to be lost in space due to a simple data
conversion error. It was determined that spacecraft software used
certain data in English units that should have been in metric units.
Among other tasks, the orbiter was to serve as a communications
relay for the Mars Polar Lander mission, which failed for unknown
reasons in December 1999. Several investigating panels were
convened to determine the process failures that allowed the error to go
undetected.
• Bugs in software supporting a large commercial high-speed data
network affected 70,000 business customers over a period of 8 days in
August of 1999. Among those affected was the electronic trading
system of the largest U.S. futures exchange, which was shut down for
most of a week as a result of the outages.
• In April of 1999 a software bug caused the failure of a $1.2 billion
U.S. military satellite launch, the costliest unmanned accident in the
history of Cape Canaveral launches. The failure was the latest in a
string of launch failures, triggering a complete military and industry
review of U.S. space launch programs, including software integration
and testing processes. Congressional oversight hearings were
requested.
• A small town in Illinois in the U.S. received an unusually large
monthly electric bill of $7 million in March of 1999. This was about
700 times larger than its normal bill. It turned out to be due to bugs
in new software that had been purchased by the local power company
to deal with Y2K software issues.
• In early 1999 a major computer game company recalled all copies of
a popular new product due to software problems. The company made
a public apology for releasing a product before it was ready.

Why is it often hard for management to get serious about quality

assurance?
Solving problems is a high-visibility process; preventing problems is
low-visibility. This is illustrated by an old parable:
In ancient China there was a family of healers, one of whom was
known throughout the land and employed as a physician to a great
lord. The physician was asked which of his family was the most
skillful healer. He replied,
"I tend to the sick and dying with drastic and dramatic treatments,
and on occasion someone is cured and my name gets out among the
lords."
"My elder brother cures sickness when it just begins to take root, and
his skills are known among the local peasants and neighbors."
"My eldest brother is able to sense the spirit of sickness and eradicate
it before it takes form. His name is unknown outside our home."

Why does software have bugs?

• miscommunication or no communication - as to specifics of what an
application should or shouldn't do (the application's requirements).
• software complexity - the complexity of current software applications
can be difficult to comprehend for anyone without experience in
modern-day software development. Windows-type interfaces, client-
server and distributed applications, data communications, enormous
relational databases, and sheer size of applications have all
contributed to the exponential growth in software/system complexity.
And the use of object-oriented techniques can complicate instead of
simplify a project unless it is well-engineered.
• programming errors - programmers, like anyone else, can make
mistakes.
• changing requirements (whether documented or undocumented) -
the customer may not understand the effects of changes, or may
understand and request them anyway - redesign, rescheduling of
engineers, effects on other projects, work already completed that may
have to be redone or thrown out, hardware requirements that may be
affected, etc. If there are many minor changes or any major changes,
known and unknown dependencies among parts of the project are
likely to interact and cause problems, and the complexity of
coordinating changes may result in errors. Enthusiasm of engineering
staff may be affected. In some fast-changing business environments,
continuously modified requirements may be a fact of life. In this case,
management must understand the resulting risks, and QA and test
engineers must adapt and plan for continuous extensive testing to
keep the inevitable bugs from running out of control - see 'What can
be done if requirements are changing continuously?' in Part 2 of the
FAQ.
• time pressures - scheduling of software projects is difficult at best,
often requiring a lot of guesswork. When deadlines loom and the
crunch comes, mistakes will be made.
• egos - people prefer to say things like:
'no problem'
'piece of cake'
'I can whip that out in a few hours'
'it should be easy to update that old code'
instead of:
'that adds a lot of complexity and we could end up
making a lot of mistakes'
'we have no idea if we can do that; we'll wing it'
'I can't estimate how long it will take, until I
take a close look at it'
'we can't figure out what that old spaghetti code
did in the first place'

If there are too many unrealistic 'no problem's', the result is bugs.

• poorly documented code - it's tough to maintain and modify code

that is badly written or poorly documented; the result is bugs. In
many organizations management provides no incentive for
programmers to document their code or write clear, understandable,
maintainable code. In fact, it's usually the opposite: they get points
mostly for quickly turning out code, and there's job security if nobody
else can understand it ('if it was hard to write, it should be hard to
read').
• software development tools - visual tools, class libraries, compilers,
scripting tools, etc. often introduce their own bugs or are poorly
documented, resulting in added bugs.

How can new Software QA processes be introduced in an existing

organization?
• A lot depends on the size of the organization and the risks involved.
For large organizations with high-risk (in terms of lives or property)
projects, serious management buy-in is required and a formalized QA
process is necessary.
• Where the risk is lower, management and organizational buy-in and
QA implementation may be a slower, step-at-a-time process. QA
processes should be balanced with productivity so as to keep
bureaucracy from getting out of hand.
• For small groups or projects, a more ad-hoc process may be
appropriate, depending on the type of customers and projects. A lot
will depend on team leads or managers, feedback to developers, and
ensuring adequate communications among customers, managers,
developers, and testers.
• The most value for effort will be in (a) requirements management
processes, with a goal of clear, complete, testable requirement
specifications embodied in requirements or design documentation and
(b) design inspections and code inspections.

What is verification? validation?

Verification typically involves reviews and meetings to evaluate
documents, plans, code, requirements, and specifications. This can be
done with checklists, issues lists, walkthroughs, and inspection
meetings. Validation typically involves actual testing and takes place
after verifications are completed. The term 'IV & V' refers to
Independent Verification and Validation.

What is a 'walkthrough'?
A 'walkthrough' is an informal meeting for evaluation or informational
purposes. Little or no preparation is usually required.

What's an 'inspection'?
An inspection is more formalized than a 'walkthrough', typically with
3-8 people including a moderator, reader, and a recorder to take
notes. The subject of the inspection is typically a document such as a
requirements spec or a test plan, and the purpose is to find problems
and see what's missing, not to fix anything. Attendees should prepare
for this type of meeting by reading thru the document; most problems
will be found during this preparation. The result of the inspection
meeting should be a written report. Thorough preparation for
inspections is difficult, painstaking work, but is one of the most cost
effective methods of ensuring quality. Employees who are most skilled
at inspections are like the 'eldest brother' in the parable in 'Why is it
often hard for management to get serious about quality assurance?'.
Their skill may have low visibility but they are extremely valuable to
any software development organization, since bug prevention is far
more cost-effective than bug detection.

What kinds of testing should be considered?

• Black box testing - not based on any knowledge of internal design or
code. Tests are based on requirements and functionality.
• White box testing - based on knowledge of the internal logic of an
application's code. Tests are based on coverage of code statements,
branches, paths, conditions.
• unit testing - the most 'micro' scale of testing; to test particular
functions or code modules. Typically done by the programmer and not
by testers, as it requires detailed knowledge of the internal program
design and code. Not always easily done unless the application has a
well-designed architecture with tight code; may require developing test
driver modules or test harnesses.
• incremental integration testing - continuous testing of an application
as new functionality is added; requires that various aspects of an
application's functionality be independent enough to work separately
before all parts of the program are completed, or that test drivers be
developed as needed; done by programmers or by testers.
• integration testing - testing of combined parts of an application to
determine if they function together correctly. The 'parts' can be code
modules, individual applications, client and server applications on a
network, etc. This type of testing is especially relevant to client/server
and distributed systems.
• functional testing - black-box type testing geared to functional
requirements of an application; this type of testing should be done by
testers. This doesn't mean that the programmers shouldn't check that
their code works before releasing it (which of course applies to any
stage of testing.)
• system testing - black-box type testing that is based on overall
requirements specifications; covers all combined parts of a system.
• end-to-end testing - similar to system testing; the 'macro' end of the
test scale; involves testing of a complete application environment in a
situation that mimics real-world use, such as interacting with a
database, using network communications, or interacting with other
hardware, applications, or systems if appropriate.
• sanity testing or smoke testing - typically an initial testing effort to
determine if a new software version is performing well enough to
accept it for a major testing effort. For example, if the new software is
crashing systems every 5 minutes, bogging down systems to a crawl,
or corrupting databases, the software may not be in a 'sane' enough
condition to warrant further testing in its current state.
• regression testing - re-testing after fixes or modifications of the
software or its environment. It can be difficult to determine how much
re-testing is needed, especially near the end of the development cycle.
Automated testing tools can be especially useful for this type of
testing.
• acceptance testing - final testing based on specifications of the end-
user or customer, or based on use by end-users/customers over some
limited period of time.
• load testing - testing an application under heavy loads, such as
testing of a web site under a range of loads to determine at what point
the system's response time degrades or fails.
• stress testing - term often used interchangeably with 'load' and
'performance' testing. Also used to describe such tests as system
functional testing while under unusually heavy loads, heavy repetition
of certain actions or inputs, input of large numerical values, large
complex queries to a database system, etc.
• performance testing - term often used interchangeably with 'stress'
and 'load' testing. Ideally 'performance' testing (and any other 'type' of
testing) is defined in requirements documentation or QA or Test Plans.

• usability testing - testing for 'user-friendliness'. Clearly this is

subjective, and will depend on the targeted end-user or customer.
User interviews, surveys, video recording of user sessions, and other
techniques can be used. Programmers and testers are usually not
appropriate as usability testers.
• install/uninstall testing - testing of full, partial, or upgrade
install/uninstall processes.
• recovery testing - testing how well a system recovers from crashes,
hardware failures, or other catastrophic problems.
• security testing - testing how well the system protects against
unauthorized internal or external access, willful damage, etc; may
require sophisticated testing techniques.
• compatability testing - testing how well software performs in a
particular hardware/software/operating system/network/etc.
environment.
• exploratory testing - often taken to mean a creative, informal
software test that is not based on formal test plans or test cases;
testers may be learning the software as they test it.
• ad-hoc testing - similar to exploratory testing, but often taken to
mean that the testers have significant understanding of the software
before testing it.
• user acceptance testing - determining if software is satisfactory to an
end-user or customer.
• comparison testing - comparing software weaknesses and strengths
to competing products.
• alpha testing - testing of an application when development is nearing
completion; minor design changes may still be made as a result of
such testing. Typically done by end-users or others, not by
programmers or testers.
• beta testing - testing when development and testing are essentially
completed and final bugs and problems need to be found before final
release. Typically done by end-users or others, not by programmers or
testers.
• mutation testing - a method for determining if a set of test data or
test cases is useful, by deliberately introducing various code changes
('bugs') and retesting with the original test data/cases to determine if
the 'bugs' are detected. Proper implementation requires large
computational resources.

What are 5 common problems in the software development

process?
• poor requirements - if requirements are unclear, incomplete, too
general, or not testable, there will be problems.
• unrealistic schedule - if too much work is crammed in too little time,
problems are inevitable.
• inadequate testing - no one will know whether or not the program is
any good until the customer complains or systems crash.
• featuritis - requests to pile on new features after development is
underway; extremely common.
• miscommunication - if developers don't know what's needed or
customer's have erroneous expectations, problems are guaranteed.

What are 5 common solutions to software development problems?

• solid requirements - clear, complete, detailed, cohesive, attainable,

testable requirements that are agreed to by all players. Use prototypes
to help nail down requirements.
• realistic schedules - allow adequate time for planning, design,
testing, bug fixing, re-testing, changes, and documentation; personnel
should be able to complete the project without burning out.
• adequate testing - start testing early on, re-test after fixes or
changes, plan for adequate time for testing and bug-fixing.
• stick to initial requirements as much as possible - be prepared to
defend against changes and additions once development has begun,
and be prepared to explain consequences. If changes are necessary,
they should be adequately reflected in related schedule changes. If
possible, use rapid prototyping during the design phase so that
customers can see what to expect. This will provide them a higher
comfort level with their requirements decisions and minimize changes
later on.
• communication - require walkthroughs and inspections when
appropriate; make extensive use of group communication tools - e-
mail, groupware, networked bug-tracking tools and change
management tools, intranet capabilities, etc.; insure that
documentation is available and up-to-date - preferably electronic, not
paper; promote teamwork and cooperation; use protoypes early on so
that customers' expectations are clarified.

What is software 'quality'?

Quality software is reasonably bug-free, delivered on time and within
budget, meets requirements and/or expectations, and is maintainable.
However, quality is obviously a subjective term. It will depend on who
the 'customer' is and their overall influence in the scheme of things. A
wide-angle view of the 'customers' of a software development project
might include end-users, customer acceptance testers, customer
contract officers, customer management, the development
organization's management/accountants/testers/salespeople, future
software maintenance engineers, stockholders, magazine columnists,
etc. Each type of 'customer' will have their own slant on 'quality' - the
accounting department might define quality in terms of profits while
an end-user might define quality as user-friendly and bug-free.

What kinds of testing should be considered?

• Black box testing - not based on any knowledge of internal design or
code. Tests are based on requirements and functionality.
• White box testing - based on knowledge of the internal logic of an
application's code. Tests are based on coverage of code statements,
branches, paths, conditions.
• unit testing - the most 'micro' scale of testing; to test particular
functions or code modules. Typically done by the programmer and not
by testers, as it requires detailed knowledge of the internal program
design and code. Not always easily done unless the application has a
well-designed architecture with tight code; may require developing test
driver modules or test harnesses.
• incremental integration testing - continuous testing of an application
as new functionality is added; requires that various aspects of an
application's functionality be independent enough to work separately
before all parts of the program are completed, or that test drivers be
developed as needed; done by programmers or by testers.
• integration testing - testing of combined parts of an application to
determine if they function together correctly. The 'parts' can be code
modules, individual applications, client and server applications on a
network, etc. This type of testing is especially relevant to client/server
and distributed systems.
• functional testing - black-box type testing geared to functional
requirements of an application; this type of testing should be done by
testers. This doesn't mean that the programmers shouldn't check that
their code works before releasing it (which of course applies to any
stage of testing.)
• system testing - black-box type testing that is based on overall
requirements specifications; covers all combined parts of a system.
• end-to-end testing - similar to system testing; the 'macro' end of the
test scale; involves testing of a complete application environment in a
situation that mimics real-world use, such as interacting with a
database, using network communications, or interacting with other
hardware, applications, or systems if appropriate.
• sanity testing or smoke testing - typically an initial testing effort to
determine if a new software version is performing well enough to
accept it for a major testing effort. For example, if the new software is
crashing systems every 5 minutes, bogging down systems to a crawl,
or corrupting databases, the software may not be in a 'sane' enough
condition to warrant further testing in its current state.
• regression testing - re-testing after fixes or modifications of the
software or its environment. It can be difficult to determine how much
re-testing is needed, especially near the end of the development cycle.
Automated testing tools can be especially useful for this type of
testing.
• acceptance testing - final testing based on specifications of the end-
user or customer, or based on use by end-users/customers over some
limited period of time.
• load testing - testing an application under heavy loads, such as
testing of a web site under a range of loads to determine at what point
the system's response time degrades or fails.
• stress testing - term often used interchangeably with 'load' and
'performance' testing. Also used to describe such tests as system
functional testing while under unusually heavy loads, heavy repetition
of certain actions or inputs, input of large numerical values, large
complex queries to a database system, etc.
• performance testing - term often used interchangeably with 'stress'
and 'load' testing. Ideally 'performance' testing (and any other 'type' of
testing) is defined in requirements documentation or QA or Test Plans.

• usability testing - testing for 'user-friendliness'. Clearly this is

subjective, and will depend on the targeted end-user or customer.
User interviews, surveys, video recording of user sessions, and other
techniques can be used. Programmers and testers are usually not
appropriate as usability testers.
• install/uninstall testing - testing of full, partial, or upgrade
install/uninstall processes.
• recovery testing - testing how well a system recovers from crashes,
hardware failures, or other catastrophic problems.
• security testing - testing how well the system protects against
unauthorized internal or external access, willful damage, etc; may
require sophisticated testing techniques.
• compatability testing - testing how well software performs in a
particular hardware/software/operating system/network/etc.
environment.
• exploratory testing - often taken to mean a creative, informal
software test that is not based on formal test plans or test cases;
testers may be learning the software as they test it.
• ad-hoc testing - similar to exploratory testing, but often taken to
mean that the testers have significant understanding of the software
before testing it.
• user acceptance testing - determining if software is satisfactory to an
end-user or customer.
• comparison testing - comparing software weaknesses and strengths
to competing products.
• alpha testing - testing of an application when development is nearing
completion; minor design changes may still be made as a result of
such testing. Typically done by end-users or others, not by
programmers or testers.
• beta testing - testing when development and testing are essentially
completed and final bugs and problems need to be found before final
release. Typically done by end-users or others, not by programmers or
testers.
• mutation testing - a method for determining if a set of test data or
test cases is useful, by deliberately introducing various code changes
('bugs') and retesting with the original test data/cases to determine if
the 'bugs' are detected. Proper implementation requires large
computational resources.

What are 5 common problems in the software development

process?
• poor requirements - if requirements are unclear, incomplete, too
general, or not testable, there will be problems.
• unrealistic schedule - if too much work is crammed in too little time,
problems are inevitable.
• inadequate testing - no one will know whether or not the program is
any good until the customer complains or systems crash.
• featuritis - requests to pile on new features after development is
underway; extremely common.
• miscommunication - if developers don't know what's needed or
customer's have erroneous expectations, problems are guaranteed.

What are 5 common solutions to software development problems?

• solid requirements - clear, complete, detailed, cohesive, attainable,

testable requirements that are agreed to by all players. Use prototypes
to help nail down requirements.
• realistic schedules - allow adequate time for planning, design,
testing, bug fixing, re-testing, changes, and documentation; personnel
should be able to complete the project without burning out.
• adequate testing - start testing early on, re-test after fixes or
changes, plan for adequate time for testing and bug-fixing.
• stick to initial requirements as much as possible - be prepared to
defend against changes and additions once development has begun,
and be prepared to explain consequences. If changes are necessary,
they should be adequately reflected in related schedule changes. If
possible, use rapid prototyping during the design phase so that
customers can see what to expect. This will provide them a higher
comfort level with their requirements decisions and minimize changes
later on.
• communication - require walkthroughs and inspections when
appropriate; make extensive use of group communication tools - e-
mail, groupware, networked bug-tracking tools and change
management tools, intranet capabilities, etc.; insure that
documentation is available and up-to-date - preferably electronic, not
paper; promote teamwork and cooperation; use protoypes early on so
that customers' expectations are clarified.

What is software 'quality'?

Quality software is reasonably bug-free, delivered on time and within
budget, meets requirements and/or expectations, and is maintainable.
However, quality is obviously a subjective term. It will depend on who
the 'customer' is and their overall influence in the scheme of things. A
wide-angle view of the 'customers' of a software development project
might include end-users, customer acceptance testers, customer
contract officers, customer management, the development
organization's management/accountants/testers/salespeople, future
software maintenance engineers, stockholders, magazine columnists,
etc. Each type of 'customer' will have their own slant on 'quality' - the
accounting department might define quality in terms of profits while
an end-user might define quality as user-friendly and bug-free.
What is 'good code'?
'Good code' is code that works, is bug free, and is readable and
maintainable. Some organizations have coding 'standards' that all
developers are supposed to adhere to, but everyone has different ideas
about what's best, or what is too many or too few rules. There are also
various theories and metrics, such as McCabe Complexity metrics. It
should be kept in mind that excessive use of standards and rules can
stifle productivity and creativity. 'Peer reviews', 'buddy checks' code
analysis tools, etc. can be used to check for problems and enforce
standards.

For C and C++ coding, here are some typical ideas to consider in
setting rules/standards; these may or may not apply to a particular
situation:
• minimize or eliminate use of global variables.
• use descriptive function and method names - use both upper and
lower case, avoid abbreviations, use as many characters as necessary
to be adequately descriptive (use of more than 20 characters is not out
of line); be consistent in naming conventions.
• use descriptive variable names - use both upper and lower case,
avoid abbreviations, use as many characters as necessary to be
adequately descriptive (use of more than 20 characters is not out of
line); be consistent in naming conventions.
• function and method sizes should be minimized; less than 100 lines
of code is good, less than 50 lines is preferable.
• function descriptions should be clearly spelled out in comments
preceding a function's code.
• organize code for readability.
• use whitespace generously - vertically and horizontally
• each line of code should contain 70 characters max.
• one code statement per line.
• coding style should be consistent throught a program (eg, use of
brackets, indentations, naming conventions, etc.)
• in adding comments, err on the side of too many rather than too few
comments; a common rule of thumb is that there should be at least as
many lines of comments (including header blocks) as lines of code.
• no matter how small, an application should include documentaion of
the overall program function and flow (even a few paragraphs is better
than nothing); or if possible a separate flow chart and detailed
program documentation.
• make extensive use of error handling procedures and status and
error logging.
• for C++, to minimize complexity and increase maintainability, avoid
too many levels of inheritance in class heirarchies (relative to the size
and complexity of the application). Minimize use of multiple
inheritance, and minimize use of operator overloading (note that the
Java programming language eliminates multiple inheritance and
operator overloading.)
• for C++, keep class methods small, less than 50 lines of code per
method is preferable.
• for C++, make liberal use of exception handlers

What is 'good design'?

'Design' could refer to many things, but often refers to 'functional
design' or 'internal design'. Good internal design is indicated by
software code whose overall structure is clear, understandable, easily
modifiable, and maintainable; is robust with sufficient error-handling
and status logging capability; and works correctly when implemented.
Good functional design is indicated by an application whose
functionality can be traced back to customer and end-user
requirements. (See further discussion of functional and internal
design in 'What's the big deal about requirements?' in FAQ #2.) For
programs that have a user interface, it's often a good idea to assume
that the end user will have little computer knowledge and may not
read a user manual or even the on-line help; some common rules-of-
thumb include:
• the program should act in a way that least surprises the user
• it should always be evident to the user what can be done next and
how to exit
• the program shouldn't let the users do something stupid without
warning them.

What is SEI? CMM? ISO? IEEE? ANSI? Will it help?

• SEI = 'Software Engineering Institute' at Carnegie-Mellon University;
initiated by the U.S. Defense Department to help improve software
development processes.
• CMM = 'Capability Maturity Model', developed by the SEI. It's a
model of 5 levels of organizational 'maturity' that determine
effectiveness in delivering quality software. It is geared to large
organizations such as large U.S. Defense Department contractors.
However, many of the QA processes involved are appropriate to any
organization, and if reasonably applied can be helpful. Organizations
can receive CMM ratings by undergoing assessments by qualified
auditors.

Level 1 - characterized by chaos, periodic panics, and heroic efforts

required by individuals to successfully complete projects. Few if any
processes in place; successes may not be repeatable.

Level 2 - software project tracking, requirements management,

realistic planning, and configuration management processes are in
place; successful practices can be repeated.

Level 3 - standard software development and maintenance processes

are integrated throughout an organization; a Software Engineering
Process Group is is in place to oversee software processes, and
training programs are used to ensure understanding and compliance.

Level 4 - metrics are used to track productivity, processes, and

products. Project performance is predictable, and quality is
consistently high.

Level 5 - the focus is on continouous process improvement. The

impact of new processes and technologies can be predicted and
effectively implemented when required.

Perspective on CMM ratings: During 1997-2001, 1018 organizations

were assessed. Of those, 27% were rated at Level 1, 39% at 2, 23% at
3, 6% at 4, and 5% at 5. (For ratings during the period 1992-96, 62%
were at Level 1, 23% at 2, 13% at 3, 2% at 4, and
0.4% at 5.) The median size of organizations was 100 software
engineering/maintenance personnel; 32% of organizations were U.S.
federal contractors or agencies. For those rated at
Level 1, the most problematical key process area was in Software
Quality Assurance.

• ISO = 'International Organisation for Standardization' - The ISO

9001:2000 standard (which replaces the previous standard of 1994)
concerns quality systems that are assessed by outside auditors, and it
applies to many kinds of production and manufacturing organizations,
not just software. It covers documentation, design, development,
production, testing, installation, servicing, and other processes. The
full set of standards consists of: (a)Q9001-2000 - Quality Management
Systems: Requirements; (b)Q9000-2000 - Quality Management
Systems: Fundamentals and Vocabulary; (c)Q9004-2000 - Quality
Management Systems: Guidelines for Performance Improvements. To
be ISO 9001 certified, a third-party auditor assesses an organization,
and certification is typically good for about 3 years, after which a
complete reassessment is required. Note that ISO certification does
not necessarily indicate quality products - it indicates only that
documented processes are followed. Also see http://www.iso.ch/ for
the latest information. In the U.S. the standards can be purchased via
the ASQ web site at http://e-standards.asq.org/

• IEEE = 'Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers' - among

other things, creates standards such as 'IEEE Standard for Software
Test Documentation' (IEEE/ANSI Standard 829), 'IEEE Standard of
Software Unit Testing (IEEE/ANSI Standard 1008), 'IEEE Standard for
Software Quality Assurance Plans' (IEEE/ANSI Standard 730), and
others.

• ANSI = 'American National Standards Institute', the primary

industrial standards body in the U.S.; publishes some software-related
standards in conjunction with the IEEE and ASQ (American Society
for Quality).

• Other software development process assessment methods besides

CMM and ISO 9000 include SPICE, Trillium, TickIT. and Bootstrap.

What is the 'software life cycle'?

The life cycle begins when an application is first conceived and ends
when it is no longer in use. It includes aspects such as initial concept,
requirements analysis, functional design, internal design,
documentation planning, test planning, coding, document
preparation, integration, testing, maintenance, updates, retesting,
phase-out, and other aspects.

Will automated testing tools make testing easier?

• Possibly. For small projects, the time needed to learn and implement
them may not be worth it. For larger projects, or on-going long-term
projects they can be valuable.
• A common type of automated tool is the 'record/playback' type. For
example, a tester could click through all combinations of menu
choices, dialog box choices, buttons, etc. in an application GUI and
have them 'recorded' and the results logged by a tool. The 'recording' is
typically in the form of text based on a scripting language that is
interpretable by the testing tool. If new buttons are added, or some
underlying code in the application is changed, etc. the application
might then be retested by just 'playing back' the 'recorded' actions,
and comparing the logging results to check effects of the changes. The
problem with such tools is that if there are continual changes to the
system being tested, the 'recordings' may have to be changed so much
that it becomes very time-consuming to continuously update the
scripts. Additionally, interpretation and analysis of results (screens,
data, logs, etc.) can be a difficult task. Note that there are
record/playback tools for text-based interfaces also, and for all types
of platforms.
• Other automated tools can include:
code analyzers - monitor code complexity, adherence to standards, etc.

coverage analyzers - these tools check which parts of the code have
been exercised by a test, and may be oriented to code statement
coverage, condition coverage, path coverage, etc.
memory analyzers - such as bounds-checkers and leak detectors.
load/performance test tools - for testing client/server and web
applications under various load
levels.
web test tools - to check that links are valid, HTML code usage is
correct, client-side and server-side programs work, a web site's
interactions are secure.

other tools - for test case management, documentation management,

bug reporting, and configuration management.