Implementation of Path Testing and Applications of Path Testing:

Path Testing is a process which involves all the available paths in a program from an entry to an exit in such a way
that the entire path is thoroughly tested. Path testing implementation and applications can be categorized as follows.

Integration, Coverage & Paths in called Components :

The technique of path testing is mainly employed in unit testing. Classical unit testing mainly involves the use of
stubs for replacement of all called and corequisite components there by testing the new component individually.
Path testing process which is carried out at the phase is to control flow errors rather than focusing on bugs is called
and corequisite components.

Concentrating on interfaces, we collaborate the new component with stubs as a result, we will be able to discover
all interface related issues. After collaborating we then retest the conjoined component with called and corequisite,
replacing the stubs, this conjoined component can now be integrated again with some other component this process
is known as bottom up integration.

Coverage issue arises since, subroutines and corequisite components are considered to be part of the component and
hence, increasing the complexity as large code need to be processed which makes path sensitization much difficult.

The main intention behind path testing is that testing each level at any time increases the effectiveness of the test but
the drawback associated with this approach is that it results in predicate coverage and blindness i.e., outcome of one
level may not be compatible with the outcome of other consecutive levels.

New Code:

The new code has to be given higher priority for testing then the old trusted components.
Paths within the low level components are also tested so that there should not be any unachievable path at higher
level.
We must consider the following aspects for selecting a path at any higher level
1. Select the small path available.
2. give the last priority for loop selection.
3. They to get rid of lower level complexity.

Unit testing must be automated in such a way that it must perform the testing at each level of integration.

Maintenance:

Path testing will be carried out on the integration of modified components but called and corequisite components
will be kept changed.
Automated unit testing will retest the integration of modified components with corequisite and called components
mean while stores their adaptation.
As the maintenance methods are studied further a new methodology will be discovered which will help us to
achieve the desired coverage.

Rehosting:

Rehosting is a process of transforming the old software environment into a new more friendly environment in which
rehosted software can run cost effectively. Path testing along with the structural test generators will produce a
powerful, efficient and an effective rehosting process. You cannot rehost the software while performing changes in
its environment i.e., the two things cant be done simultaneously. Rehosting can be done in following ways.

Step 1: creation and testing of interpreter between new and old environment is the first step. If there are any bugs,
rehosting process will capture them.

Step 2: complete path testing is done for old software in old environment mean while outcomes of everything
integration are recorded.
These outcomes series as a guideline for rehosted software. The outcomes and testcase are adapted by the new
environment with the help of another interpreter. These adapted environment and software are integrated and
retested.

This approach might be even more costlier than building the new software, but it provides us with an environment
which suites the requirement of a software thereby providing stable and reliable software base with out bothering
about the issues pertaining to software security.

UNIT II
TRANSACTION FLOW TESTING AND DATA FLOW TESTING

INTRODUCTION:

O A transaction is a unit of work seen from a system user's point of view.

O A transaction consists of a sequence of operations, some of which are
performed by a system, persons or devices that are outside of the system.
O Transaction begins with Birth-that is they are created as a result of some
external act.
O At the conclusion of the transaction's processing, the transaction is no longer in
the system.
O Example of a transaction: A transaction for an online information retrieval
system might consist of the following steps or tasks:
 ▪ Accept input (tentative birth)
 ▪ Validate input (birth)
▪ Transmit acknowledgement to requester
 ▪ Do input processing
▪ Search file
 ▪ Request directions from user
▪ Accept input
 ▪ Validate input
▪ Process request
 ▪ Update file
▪ Transmit output
▪ Record transaction in log and clean up (death)

TRANSACTION FLOW GRAPHS:

O Transaction flows are introduced as a representation of a system's processing.

O The methods that were applied to control flow graphs are then used for
functional testing.
O Transaction flows and transaction flow testing are to the independent system
tester what control flows are path testing are to the programmer.
O The transaction flow graph is to create a behavioral model of the program that
leads to functional testing.
O The transaction flowgraph is a model of the structure of the system's behavior
(functionality).
O An example of a Transaction Flow is as follows:
 Figure 3.1: An Example of a Transaction Flow

USAGE:
O Transaction flows are indispensable for specifying requirements of complicated
systems, especially online systems.
O A big system such as an air traffic control or airline reservation system, has not
hundreds, but thousands of different transaction flows.
O The flows are represented by relatively simple flowgraphs, many of which have a
single straight-through path.
O Loops are infrequent compared to control flowgraphs.
O The most common loop is used to request a retry after user input errors. An ATM
system, for example, allows the user to try, say three times, and will take the card
away the fourth time.
IMPLEMENTATIONS OF TRANSACTION FLOWS :
Transaction flow has an implicit representation of system control structure. That is there is no direct relation
between the process and decisions. A transaction flow is represented by a path where each transaction is passed
from routine to routine. These transactions present in that block are processed account to their flows.

Each transaction is represented by a token and the transaction flow graph shows a pictorial representation of these
tokens. The transaction flowgraph is not the control structure of the program.
It explained as follows
1. the transaction goes through input processing and then passes through passes A.
2. the result of A passes through B followed by process B.
3. the transaction then passes through either D or E for output process.

The above diagram represents a system control structure. This system control structure is controlled either by an
executive or scheduler or dispatcher operating system. The links in the structure either presents process queues or a
dispatcher queue. The transaction is created by placing a token on an input queue. The scheduler operating system
examines the transaction and places it on the process queue. Process 2 will not be activated immediately for a new
transaction until an existing transaction present in process is complexity executed.
After the completion of that transaction, the transaction control block is done based on the information stored. The
transaction control block is examined and the scheduler route it to the next process. The information in the block is
stored in tables rather than explicit code. Alternatively, the dispatcher operating system does not contain data
related to transaction control. Therefore the information can be implemented as a code in each of the processing
modules.
The above figure shows a simplified representation of transaction flow. The processing order of transaction flow is
A,B,C,D,E, processes are invoked regardless of their order.
But in case of fixed processing order, different transactions are processed according to their priorities.
In multiprocessing systems, there is no direct correspondence between the process and transactions flows. A
transaction will however receive attention from the processing modules in the static order. But there could be many
other things going on between the instances of these transactions.
The above figure scheduler invokes module A, which cleans up all of its task. The disk reads are performed and
the scheduler again invokes module A for processing any additional work that has been assigned to it. After the
disk writes are performed, module C is invoked to clean up all the tasks of transactions waiting for
Module C. this process continues further and the whole loop starts again.

The processing modules of this structure should not be invoked in fixed order. Therefore the length of the queues
for those modules can be determined by
1. priority of tasks
2. priority of active modules and
3. state of system with respect to input and output operations.

COMPLICATIONS:
O In simple cases, the transactions have a unique identity from the time they're
created to the time they're completed.
O In many systems the transactions can give birth to others, and transactions can
also merge.
O Births: There are three different possible interpretations of the decision symbol,
or nodes with two or more out links. It can be a Decision, Biosis or a Mitosis.
1. Decision: Here the transaction will take one alternative or the other
alternative but not both. (See Figure 3.2 (a))
2. Biosis: Here the incoming transaction gives birth to a new transaction, and
both transaction continue on their separate paths, and the parent retains it
identity. (See Figure 3.2 (b))
3. Mitosis: Here the parent transaction is destroyed and two new transactions
are created.(See Figure 3.2 (c))

Figure 3.2: Nodes with multiple outlinks

Mergers: Transaction flow junction points are potentially as troublesome as transaction flow
splits. There are three types of junctions: (1) Ordinary Junction (2) Absorption (3) Conjugation
1 Ordinary Junction: An ordinary junction which is similar to the junction in a control flow
graph. A transaction can arrive either on one link or the other. (See Figure 3.3 (a))
2 Absorption: In absorption case, the predator transaction absorbs prey transaction. The prey
gone but the predator retains its identity. (See Figure 3.3 (b))
3 Conjugation: In conjugation case, the two parent transactions merge to form a new
daughter. In keeping with the biological flavor this case is called as conjugation.(See Figure
3.3 (c))
 Figure 3.3: Transaction Flow Junctions and Mergers
We have no problem with ordinary decisions and junctions. Births, absorptions, and conjugations
are as problematic for the software designer as they are for the software modeler and the test
designer; as a consequence, such points have more than their share of bugs. The common
problems are: lost daughters, wrongful deaths, and illegitimate births.
The following are the some possible loses:

Biosis: the parent flow is followed from beginning of a transaction flow to the end of a
transaction flow. A new birth is treated as a new flow either to end or to absorb that birth.
Mitosis: It begins from the parent is flow to the Mitosis point. From Mitosis point, an additional
flow starts and get destroyed at their respective ends.
Absorption: In this situation, the parents flow is treated as the primary flow. The primary flow is
modelled from its absorption point to the point at which it gets destroyed.
Conjugation: This situation is the opposite of mitosis situation. Each parent flow is modelled
from its birth to the conjugation point and from the conjugation point, the result child starts and
gets destroyed.

Biosis, Mitosis, absorption and conjugation are problematic for software designers. Illegal births,
wrongful deaths and lost children are some of the common problems. Although the transaction
flow is modelled by simple flowgraphs they recognize bugs where transactions are created,
absorbed and conjugated.

Transaction Flow Structure:

Transaction flow is a representation of a path taken by a transaction through a succession of

processing modules. This can be represented as a token.
Transaction flows like control flows, it doesn’t follow that what constitutes good structure for
code constitutes good structure for transaction flows. Transaction flows are often structured due
to the following reason.

1. It is not just code, it’s a model of a process. Sometimes programmers may be involved in loops, decisions and so
on. We can’t bind users behaviour to software structure rules no matter how frequently we might wish it.
2. parts of the flows may incorporate the behaviour of other systems over which we have no control.
3. No small part of the totality of transaction flows exists to model error conditions, failures, malfunctions and
subsequent recovery actions.
4. The complexity of individual transactions and the number of transactions may grows over time as features are
added and enhanced.
5. Some times systems are built out of modular and the transaction flows results from the interaction of those
modules. The designers of good system suggests that change or modifying the modules.
6. in some cases the results of attempting to structure, the transaction flows could be inefficient processing, poor
response times, lost transactions integrity and so on.
TRANSACTION FLOW TESTING TECHNIQUES:

• GET THE TRANSACTIONS FLOWS:

O Complicated systems that process a lot of different, complicated transactions
should have explicit representations of the transactions flows, or the equivalent.
O Transaction flows are like control flow graphs, and consequently we
should expect to have them in increasing levels of detail.
O The system's design documentation should contain an overview section that
details the main transaction flows.
O Detailed transaction flows are a mandatory pre requisite to the rational design of a
system's functional test.
O Transaction flow is a sequence of steps for a system to be tested. The transaction
flows begins at the preliminary design and continues as the project progression.
The following strategies has been taken.
INSPECTIONS, REVIEWS AND WALKTHROUGHS:

INSPECTIONS :

Inspections are the most cost effective quality process that holds for testing. The
process include different phases such as “ design phase, coding, testing, disk
checking and debugging”.
An inspection is a technique to detect errors by reading by group of code. This is
often done by the developers or the programmers. A check list has been compared
with the code to check errors. The duties of the programmer include
1. Distributing the requirements, scheduling and inspecting the modules.
2. loading the session or module.
3. Detecting the errors.
4. Confirming that errors are corrected.

Inspection is a methodology that humans can do and the computers can’t. some of
the examples are:

CHECKING THE SYNTAX ERRORS: These would n’t be any syntax errors
after inspections if humans do syntax checking.

REFERRING THE PROGRAM: the language processor errors check the

undeclared variables, uninitialized values and the tables that are not been referred
in the program. This is a tough job to be done by humans.

VIOLATING RULES : A program have some rules for declaring variables,

labels, functions, subroutines, and so on. There may also be some conventions for
the usage of memory. Hence, violations of these conventions is a form of syntax
checking. A problem occurs for the language features that support automatic
checking. If the facilities for an automatic checking are not available then the
person should check or inspect the code manually.
The program is processed by examining one convention at a time, rather than
checking all conventions simultaneously. It is a faster process to read the program
for different conventions at different times.

COMPARISON OF CODE: it is a mind blogging task where the coding sheet is

compared character by character to the code on key punched cards.

REFERENCING CODE: When a program is directly entered into a personal

computer, the code has been referred or read by a programmer. It is an easier and
faster way to check the errors for data structures, control flow and also for
processing.
COMPARING THE FLOW GRAPH: the flow graph is created from the compile
code and compared to the design flowgraph. It’s not an automatic task for
comparison.

SENSITIZING PATH INSPECTION: the inspection should be path sensitizing

i.e., the code cannot forced to check bugs. Once the values of sensitizing path
have been found then necessary checking is done to every line of code involved in
the control flow.

REVIEWS: Reviews are used to check semantics of a document. The quality of

the documents can be examined and assured by eliminating the defects and
mistakes from the documents. These inconsistencies can be found after the
completion of documents.

It has the following phases in process

1. REVIEW PLANNING: During planning phase, the documents in the software

development process and assigned a review technique.
Every individual review has a review leader and a review team of its own. The
document is read and checked from different points while planning the review.

2. REVIEW DOCUMENT INFORMATION: all necessary information is

provided when the review team is organized. The information about the document
is shared and reviewed document must be used to decide if a particular statement
is correct or wrong.

3. PREPARING REVIEW MEETING: the review meeting is prepared by

individual review team members. The inconsistencies and the defects checked
against the documents are studied by reviewers.

4. OBJECTIVE OF THE REVIEW MEETING: the review meeting is handled by

a review leader. The review leader must ensure that the requirements of all the
reviewers has met to find the defects and will be able to express their opinion
without any fear.

5. TAKING A DIFFERENT PROCESS: The review manager selects a different

technique on the basis of the review results.

6. REVIEW SCHEDULING: if the results of the first review was not acceptable,
then another review has been assigned by the review manager to correct the
defects.
Depending on the review object, reviews can be classified as follows.

7. FEASIBILITY REVIEW: This review depends upon the logical flow of the
document. Here every unit in the document is feasible to test.

8. REQUIREMENTS REVIEW: this review depends upon the requirement or

attributes in the document. A system in this review can handle the structural limit
of a transaction.
 WALK THROUGHS:

A walkthroughs is an informal review method compared to the other types of

reviews. It is a way of finding objects or problems or anomalies in the written
documentation.

In the review meeting, scenarios are walked through i.e., the reviewers try to
reveal defects and problems by asking questions. Walk through is a technique or a
set of procedures to detect errors by reading a group of code. It is often used as a
part of testing cycle. Walkthroughs has a team similar to that of a reviewer team
and consists of there people.

1. The first person plays the role of a secretary to record errors.

2. The second person is similar to that of a review leader.
3. the third person plays the role of a tester to clear the defects.

During the meeting the tester comes with a set of inputs to walked through the
logic flow of the program. Each test case is individually executed and must be
simple because the errors found in the process of questioning the programmer are
more than the errors found by the test cases.

• PATH SELECTION:

O Select a set of covering paths (c1+c2) using the analogous criteria you used for
structural path testing.
O Select a covering set of paths based on functionally sensible transactions as you
would for control flow graphs.
O Try to find the most tortuous, longest, strangest path from the entry to the exit of
the transaction flow.
• PATH SENSITIZATION:

O Most of the normal paths are very easy to sensitize-80% - 95% transaction flow
coverage (c1+c2) is usually easy to achieve.
O The remaining small percentage is often very difficult.
O Sensitization is the act of defining the transaction. If there are sensitization
problems on the easy paths, then bet on either a bug in transaction flows or a
design bug.
• PATH INSTRUMENTATION:

O Instrumentation plays a bigger role in transaction flow testing than in unit path
testing.
O The information of the path taken for a given transaction must be kept with that
transaction and can be recorded by a central transaction dispatcher or by the
individual processing modules.
O In some systems, such traces are provided by the operating systems or a running
log.
PATH SELECTION AND ITS ADVANTEGES AND DISADVANTES IN TRANSACTION FLOW

The path selection the system testing is a based on transaction flows from the other unit, tests that are
based on transaction flows from the other unit, tests that are based on control flowgraphs. A longest path
is taken to find the bugs in the module. The path is reviewed and the bugs are removed from all the
interfaces of the module after reviewing process is completed.

Advantages of path selection:

1. the transaction flow uses structural path testing for selecting a path.
2. the covering set of paths in transaction flows belong to the features of system test.
3. many bugs don’t occur in this path selection.
4. the weird paths in transaction flow solve many problems like missing interlocks, duplicated interlocks,
interface problems, duplicated processing and programs working at cross purposes.
5. the cost is paid only on some well known transactions.
6. the path selection is effective.

Disadvantages of path selection:

1. the path selected is longest path.

2. the code correction is expensive.
3. the bugs are caused due to implementation errors and wild cards.
4. the weird paths make the designers smirk.

SENSITIZATION, MEASUREMENT, TEST DATABASES AND EXECUTION:

1. ACT OF SENSITIZATION : The simplest paths are easy to sensitize in transaction flows. It is the act
of defining transaction. Some paths are difficult to sensitize and therefore these paths results in bug
transaction flows.

2. MEASUREMENT: during processing of modules, the information of the path taken for a transaction
must be kept. Since it plays an important role in the transaction flow testing.

3. TRANSACTION FLOW DATABASES: Every tester or programmer design his own unique
databases. The test databases in transaction flows are configuration sensitive.

4. EXECUTION : From starting, the transaction flows testing is committed to test the execution part
automatically.

Transaction Based Systems:

TRANSACTION CONTROL BLOCK: There’s an explicit transaction control block associated with
every live transaction. The block contains, among other things, the transaction type, identity and
processing state.

CENTRALIZED, COMMON PROCESSING QUEUES: Transactions are not passed directly from one
process to another but are transferred from process to process by means of centralized explicit processing
queues.

TRANSACTION DISPATCHER: There is a centralized transaction dispatcher based on the transaction’s

current state and transaction type, the next process is determined from stored dispatcher tables or a similar
mechanism.
 RECOVERY AND OTHER BUGS: Key points in the transactions life are recorded for several different
purposes the two most important being transaction recovery support and transaction accounting.

SELF TEST SUPPORT: The transaction control tables have privileged modes that can be used for test
and diagnostic purposes. There are special transaction types and states for normal transactions whose sole
purposes is to facilitate testing.

BASICS OF DATA FLOW TESTING:

• DATA FLOW TESTING:

O Data flow testing is the name given to a family of test strategies based on
selecting paths through the program's control flow in order to explore sequences
of events related to the status of data objects.
O For example, pick enough paths to assure that every data object has been
initialized prior to use or that all defined objects have been used for something.
O Motivation: It is our belief that, just as one would not feel confident about a
program without executing every statement in it as part of some test, one should
not feel confident about a program without having seen the effect of using the
value produced by each and every computation.

DATA FLOW MACHINES:

O There are two types of data flow machines with different architectures. (1) Von
Neumann machines (2) Multi-instruction, multi-data machines (MIMD).
O Von Neumann Machine Architecture:
▪ Most computers today are von-neumann machines.

▪ This architecture features interchangeable storage of instructions and data
 in the same memory units.
▪ The Von Neumann machine Architecture executes one instruction at
a time in the following, micro instruction sequence:
 ▪ Fetch instruction from memory
 ▪ Interpret instruction
▪ Fetch operands
 ▪ Process or Execute
▪ Store result
▪ Increment program counter
 ▪ GOTO 1
O Multi-instruction, Multi-data machines (MIMD) Architecture:
 ▪ These machines can fetch several instructions and objects in parallel. 
▪ They can also do arithmetic and logical operations simultaneously on
 different data objects.
▪ The decision of how to sequence them depends on the compiler.


BUG ASSUMPTION:
The bug assumption for data-flow testing strategies is that control flow is generally
correct and that something has gone wrong with the software so that data objects are not
available when they should be, or silly things are being done to data objects.
O Also, if there is a control-flow problem, we expect it to have symptoms that
can be detected by data-flow analysis.
O Although we'll be doing data-flow testing, we won't be using data flow graphs as
such. Rather, we'll use an ordinary control flow graph annotated to show what
happens to the data objects of interest at the moment.
 DATA FLOW GRAPHS:
O The data flow graph is a graph consisting of nodes and directed links.
O We will use a control graph to show what happens to data objects of interest
at that moment.
O Our objective is to expose deviations between the data flows we have and the
data flows we want.

Figure 3.4: Example of a data flow graph

O Data Object State and Usage:

 ▪ Data Objects can be created, killed and used.
▪ They can be used in two distinct ways: (1) In a Calculation (2) As a part
 of a Control Flow Predicate.
▪ The following symbols denote these possibilities:
1. Defined: d - defined, created, initialized etc
2. Killed or undefined: k - killed, undefined, released etc
3. Usage: u - used for something (c - used in Calculations, p - used
in a predicate)
▪ 1. Defined (d):
▪ An object is defined explicitly when it appears in a
 data declaration.
▪ Or implicitly when it appears on the left hand side of
 the assignment.
▪ It is also to be used to mean that a file has been opened.
▪ A dynamically allocated object has been allocated.
▪ Something is pushed on to the stack.
▪ A record written.


 2. Killed or Undefined (k):
▪ An object is killed on undefined when it is released or
otherwise made unavailable.
▪ 
▪ When its contents are no longer known with certitude
 (with absolute certainty / perfectness).
▪ Release of dynamically allocated objects back to the availability
 pool.
▪ Return of records.
 ▪ The old top of the stack after it is popped.
▪ An assignment statement can kill and redefine immediately. For
example, if A had been previously defined and we do a new
assignment such as A : = 17, we have killed A's previous value and
 redefined A
3. Usage (u):
▪ A variable is used for computation (c) when it appears on the
 right hand side of an assignment statement.
▪ A file record is read or written.
▪ It is used in a Predicate (p) when it appears directly in a predicate. 

DATA FLOW ANOMALIES:

An anomaly is a situation or condition where an object is defined but not used.

Ex: if z > 0
Then x:=x+1
Else x:=-1
z:=0
z:=0
z:=A+B
for the above example we notice that object Z is defined twice to zero. Hence an anomaly occurs.
An anomaly is denoted by a two-character sequence of actions. For example, ku means that the
object is killed and then used, where as dd means that the object is defined twice without an
intervening usage.
What is an anomaly is depend on the application.
There are nine possible two-letter combinations for d, k and u. some are bugs, some are
suspicious, and some are okay.

1 dd :- probably harmless but suspicious. Why define the object twice without an
intervening usage?
2 dk :- probably a bug. Why define the object without using it?
3 du :- the normal case. The object is defined and then used.
4 kd :- normal situation. An object is killed and then redefined.
5 kk :- harmless but probably buggy. Did you want to be sure it was really killed?
6 ku :- a bug. the object doesnot exist.
7 ud :- usually not a bug because the language permits reassignment at almost any time.
8 uk :- normal situation.
9 uu :- normal situation.
 In addition to the two letter situations, there are six single letter situations.We will use a leading
dash to mean that nothing of interest (d,k,u) occurs prior to the action noted along the entry-exit
path of interest.
A trailing dash to mean that nothing happens after the point of interest to the exit.
They possible anomalies are:
1 -k :- possibly anomalous because from the entrance to this point on the path, the
variable had not been defined. We are killing a variable that does not exist.
2 -d :- okay. This is just the first definition along this path.
3 -u :- possibly anomalous. Not anomalous if the variable is global and has
been previously defined.
4 k- :- not anomalous. The last thing done on this path was to kill the variable.
5 d- :- possibly anomalous. The variable was defined and not used on this path. But
this could be a global definition.
6 u- :- not anomalous. The variable was used but not killed on this path. Although this
sequence is not anomalous, it signals a frequent kind of bug. If d and k mean
dynamic storage allocation and return respectively, this could be an instance in
which a dynamically allocated object was not returned to the pool after use.

Classification & Detection of Anomaly:

An anomaly is a term that leads to inconsistencies in the data flow analysis.

The dataflow is referred to as reading variables without having an idea that the value of the variable is in use or
not.
During data flow analysis, every variable is referred and inspected. There are different variables in data flow
analysis. They are classified as
1. Defined (d) – value assigned to a variable.
2. referenced (r) – value read or used by a variable.
3. undefined(u) – variable that has no defined value.
Depending on these varibales three different data flow anomalies are distinguished they are
1. UR anomaly
2. DU anomaly
3. DD anomaly

1. UR ANOMALY: During data flow analysis if the undefined value of a variable (u) is read (r) then it is known as
a UR-anomaly.
2. DU ANOMALY: A defined (d) variable becomes invalid or undefined (u) variable, when a variable is not used
with in a particular time.
3. DD ANOMALY: This anomaly occurs when the variable accepts a value at the second assignment and the first
assignment value had not been used (d). this situation occurs in dd anomaly.

Ex: A=7, A=11

Void exchange(int &A, int &B)

{
int get;
if(A>B)
{
B=get;
B=A;
get=A;
}
}
Detection of anomalies :

UR anomaly : In above example, the variable get is used on the right side of an assignment. The variable
get has an undefined value because it is not initialized where it is declared. This undefined variable is
being read or referred to and hence it results in UR Anomaly.

DD anomaly : The variable B is used twice on the left side of an assignment. The first assignment value
becomes invalid or unused and the second assignment value is taken or used.

DU anomaly : The variable get has a defined value in the last assignment. The defined variables cannot be
used any where in the function because only those variables are valid which are inside the function.
Therefore, the unused variable results in DU anomaly.

In the above example, anomalies occur due to some particular statements. These anomalies can be
avoided by adding an arbitrary number of other statements in the function. Anomalies would not occur. If
a manual check such as “Review” is done. Review is a tool for detecting errors in the flow of data
analysis.

Not every anomaly leads to inconsistency and cannot directly effect the flow of data. As we see in DU
anomaly, a defined variable is not used in the program. But still the program seen properly with out
affecting the flow of data.

DATA FLOW ANOMALY STATE GRAPH:

Data flow anomaly model prescribes that an object can be in one of four distinct states:
1. K :- undefined, previously killed, doesnot exist
2. D :- defined but not yet used for anything
3. U :- has been used for computation or in predicate
4. A :- anomalous
These capital letters (K, D, U, A) denote the state of the variable and should not be confused
with the program action, denoted by lower case letters.
Unforgiving Data - Flow Anomaly Flow Graph: Unforgiving model, in which once a variable
becomes anomalous it can never return to a state of grace.

Figure 3.5: Unforgiving Data Flow Anomaly State Graph

Assume that the variable starts in the K state - that is, it has not been defined or does not exist. If
an attempt is made to use it or to kill it (e.g., say that we're talking about opening, closing, and
using files and that 'killing' means closing), the object's state becomes anomalous (state A) and,
once it is anomalous, no action can return the variable to a working state.
If it is defined (d), it goes into the D, or defined but not yet used, state. If it has been defined (D)
and redefined (d) or killed without use (k), it becomes anomalous, while usage (u) brings it to the
U state. If in U, redefinition (d) brings it to D, u keeps it in U, and k kills it.

Forgiving Data - Flow Anomaly Flow Graph: Forgiving model is an alternate model where
redemption (recover) from the anomalous state is possible

Figure 3.6: Forgiving Data Flow Anomaly State Graph

This graph has three normal and three anomalous states and he considers the kk sequence not to
be anomalous. The difference between this state graph and Figure 3.5 is that redemption is
possible. A proper action from any of the three anomalous states returns the variable to a useful
working state.

The point of showing you this alternative anomaly state graph is to demonstrate that the specifics
of an anomaly depends on such things as language, application, context, or even your frame of
mind. In principle, you must create a new definition of data flow anomaly (e.g., a new state
graph) in each situation. You must at least verify that the anomaly definition behind the theory or
imbedded in a data flow anomaly test tool is appropriate to your situation.

STATIC Vs DYNAMIC ANOMALY DETECTION:

Static analysis is analysis done on source code without actually executing it. For example: source
code syntax error detection is the static analysis result.

Dynamic analysis is done on the fly as the program is being executed and is based on
intermediate values that result from the program's execution. For example: a division by zero
warning is the dynamic result.

If a problem, such as a data flow anomaly, can be detected by static analysis methods, then it
doesn’t belongs in testing - it belongs in the language processor.
There is actually a lot more static analysis for data flow analysis for data flow anomalies
going on in current language processors.

For example, language processors which force variable declarations can detect (-u) and (ku)
anomalies.But still there are many things for which current notions of static analysis are
INADEQUATE.
Why Static Analysis isn't enough? There are many things for which current notions of
static analysis are inadequate. They are:

Dead Variables: Although it is often possible to prove that a variable is dead or alive at a
given point in the program, the general problem is unsolvable.

Arrays: Arrays are problematic in that the array is defined or killed as a single object, but
reference is to specific locations within the array. Array pointers are usually dynamically
calculated, so there's no way to do a static analysis to validate the pointer value. In many
languages, dynamically allocated arrays contain garbage unless explicitly initialized and
therefore, -u anomalies are possible.

Records and Pointers: The array problem and the difficulty with pointers is a special case
of multipart data structures. We have the same problem with records and the pointers to
them. Also, in many applications we create files and their names dynamically and there's no
way to determine, without execution, whether such objects are in the proper state on a given
path or, for that matter, whether they exist at all.

Dynamic Subroutine and Function Names in a Call: subroutine or function name is a

dynamic variable in a call. What is passed, or a combination of subroutine names and data
objects, is constructed on a specific path. There's no way, without executing the path, to
determine whether the call is correct or not.

False Anomalies: Anomalies are specific to paths. Even a "clear bug" such as ku may not be
a bug if the path along which the anomaly exist is unachievable. Such "anomalies" are false
anomalies. Unfortunately, the problem of determining whether a path is or is not achievable
is unsolvable.

Recoverable Anomalies and Alternate State Graphs: What constitutes an anomaly

depends on context, application, and semantics. How does the compiler know which model I
have in mind? It can't because the definition of "anomaly" is not fundamental. The language
processor must have a built-in anomaly definition with which you may or may not (with
good reason) agree.

Concurrency, Interrupts, System Issues: As soon as we get away from the simple single-
task uniprocessor environment and start thinking in terms of systems, most anomaly issues
become vastly more complicated.

How often do we define or create data objects at an interrupt level so that they can be
processed by a lower-priority routine? Interrupts can make the "correct" anomalous and the
"anomalous" correct. True concurrency (as in an MIMD machine) and pseudo concurrency
(as in multiprocessing) systems can do the same to us. Much of integration and system
testing is aimed at detecting data-flow anomalies that cannot be detected in the context of a
single routine.

Although static analysis methods have limits, they are worth using and a continuing trend in
language processor design has been better static analysis methods, especially for data flow
anomaly detection. That's good because it means there's less for us to do as testers and we
have far too much to do as it is.
Differences between static and dynamic data flow anomalies:

STATCI DATA FLOW ANOMALIES DYNAMIC DATA FLOW ANOMALIES

1. Static analysis is done at compile time in data 1. dynamic analysis is done at run time in data flow
flow anomaly detection. anomaly detection.
2. Static analysis is based on the source code before 2. dynamic analysis is based on the intermediate
execution. value that results from the program execution.
3. static analysis operates by building a model of 3. dynamic analysis operates by executing a
the program state, then determining how the program and observing the executions.
program reacts. 4. array pointers are dynamically calculated.
4. there’s no way to validate the pointer value in 5. dynamic analysis can be as fast as program
static analysis. execution.
5. static analysis for data flow anomaly detection is 6. the disadvantage of dynamic analysis is that its
more compact and faster than dynamic analysis. results may not generalize of further executions.
6. The disadvantage of static analysis is that results 7. the main purpose of dynamic analysis for data
are not accurate. flow anomaly detection is performing a good
7. the main purpose of static analysis for data flow dynamic analysis selecting a set of inputs or test
anomaly detection is choosing a good abstraction cases to the program being analysed.
function. 8. a division by zero warning is the example for
8. source code syntax error detection is the example dynamic analysis result.
for static analysis result.

Comparisons of Transactions and data flow graphs:

TRANSACTION FLOW GRAPH DATA FLOW GRAPH

1. Transaction flow graph is a graph consisting of 1. Data flow graph consisting of nodes and directed
node links and decision box. links.
2. It has no direct relation between the process and 2. it has direct relation between the data objects of
decisions of transaction flows. data flows.
3. transaction flowgraph is a powerful conceptual 3. data flow graph has simple tools for performing
tool. data flow testing.
4. different testing techniques are a. Inspections 4. Different testing techniques are
b. Reviews a. All DU paths
c. Walkthroughs b. All Uses
5. It is generally used in complicated systems or c. All P Uses/ Some C uses
applications. d. All C uses/Some P Uses
6. the problem that occur in transaction flowgraph e. All Definitions
are a. Births b. Merge f. All P uses
g. All C uses.
5. It is used in web applications.
6. the problem occur in data flows are
a. UR anomaly
b. DD anomaly
c. DU anomaly
DATA FLOW MODEL:

The data flow model is based on the program's control flow graph - Don't confuse that with the
program's data flow graph.
Here we annotate each link with symbols (for example, d, k, u, c, and p) or sequences of symbols
(for example, dd, du, ddd) that denote the sequence of data operations on that link with respect to
the variable of interest. Such annotations are called link weights.
The control flow graph structure is same for every variable: it is the weights that change.

Components of the model:

1. To every statement there is a node, whose name is unique. Every node has at least one
outlink and at least one inlink except for exit nodes and entry nodes.
2. Exit nodes are dummy nodes placed at the outgoing arrowheads of exit statements (e.g.,
END, RETURN), to complete the graph. Similarly, entry nodes are dummy nodes placed
at entry statements (e.g., BEGIN) for the same reason.
3. The outlink of simple statements (statements with only one outlink) are weighted by the
proper sequence of data-flow actions for that statement. Note that the sequence can
consist of more than one letter. For example, the assignment statement A:= A + B in most
languages is weighted by cd or possibly ckd for variable A. Languages that permit
multiple simultaneous assignments and/or compound statements can have anomalies
within the statement. The sequence must correspond to the order in which the object code
will be executed for that variable.
4. Predicate nodes (e.g., IF-THEN-ELSE, DO WHILE, CASE) are weighted with the p -
use(s) on every outlink, appropriate to that outlink.
5. Every sequence of simple statements (e.g., a sequence of nodes with one inlink and one
outlink) can be replaced by a pair of nodes that has, as weights on the link between them,
the concatenation of link weights.
6. If there are several data-flow actions on a given link for a given variable, then the weight
of the link is denoted by the sequence of actions on that link for that variable.
7. Conversely, a link with several data-flow actions on it can be replaced by a succession of
equivalent links, each of which has at most one data-flow action for any variable.
Let us consider the example:

Figure 3.7: Program Example (PDL)

Figure 3.8: Unannotated flow graph for example program in Figure 3.7

Figure 3.9: Control flow graph annotated for X and Y data flows.

Figure 3.10: Control flow graph annotated for Z data flow.

Figure 3.11: Control flow graph annotated for V data flow.

STRATEGIES OF DATA FLOW TESTING:

• INTRODUCTION:

O Data Flow Testing Strategies are structural strategies.

O In contrast to the path-testing strategies, data-flow strategies take into account
what happens to data objects on the links in addition to the raw connectivity of the
graph.
O In other words, data flow strategies require data-flow link weights (d,k,u,c,p).
O Data Flow Testing Strategies are based on selecting test path segments (also called
sub paths) that satisfy some characteristic of data flows for all data objects.
O For example, all sub paths that contain a d (or u, k, du, dk).
O A strategy X is stronger than another strategy Y if all test cases produced under
Y are included in those produced under X - conversely for weaker.
• TERMINOLOGY:
1. Definition-Clear Path Segment, with respect to variable X, is a connected
sequence of links such that X is (possibly) defined on the first link and not
redefined or killed on any subsequent link of that path segment. ll paths in Figure
3.9 are definition clear because variables X and Y are defined only on the first
link (1,3) and not thereafter. In Figure 3.10, we have a more complicated
situation. The following path segments are definition-clear: (1,3,4), (1,3,5),
(5,6,7,4), (7,8,9,6,7), (7,8,9,10), (7,8,10), (7,8,10,11). Subpath (1,3,4,5) is not
definition-clear because the variable is defined on (1,3) and again on (4,5). For
practice, try finding all the definition-clear subpaths for this routine (i.e., for all
variables).
2. Loop-Free Path Segment is a path segment for which every node in it is visited
atmost once. For Example, path (4,5,6,7,8,10) in Figure 3.10 is loop free, but path
(10,11,4,5,6,7,8,10,11,12) is not because nodes 10 and 11 are each visited twice.
3. Simple path segment is a path segment in which at most one node is visited
twice. For example, in Figure 3.10, (7,4,5,6,7) is a simple path segment. A simple
path segment is either loop-free or if there is a loop, only one node is involved.
4. A du path from node i to k is a path segment such that if the last link has a
computational use of X, then the path is simple and definition-clear; if the
penultimate (last but one) node is j - that is, the path is (i,p,q,...,r,s,t,j,k) and link
(j,k) has a predicate use - then the path from i to j is both loop-free and definition-
clear.

STRATEGIES: The structural test strategies discussed below are based on the program's
control flow graph. They differ in the extent to which predicate uses and/or computational uses
of variables are included in the test set. Various types of data flow testing strategies in decreasing
order of their effectiveness are:

All - du Paths (ADUP): The all-du-paths (ADUP) strategy is the strongest data-flow testing
strategy discussed here. It requires that every du path from every definition of every variable to
every some test.
FOR VARIABLE X AND Y:In Figure 3.9, because variables X and Y are used only on link (1,3), any
test that starts at the entry satisfies this criterion (for variables X and Y, but not for all variables
as required by the strategy).

For variable Z: The situation for variable Z (Figure 3.10) is more complicated because the
variable is redefined in many places. For the definition on link (1,3) we must exercise paths that
include subpaths (1,3,4) and (1,3,5). The definition on link (4,5) is covered by any path that
includes (5,6), such as subpath (1,3,4,5,6, ...). The (5,6) definition requires paths that include
subpaths (5,6,7,4) and (5,6,7,8).

For variable V: Variable V (Figure 3.11) is defined only once on link (1,3). Because V has a
predicate use at node 12 and the subsequent path to the end must be forced for both directions at
node 12, the all-du-paths strategy for this variable requires that we exercise all loop-free
entry/exit paths and at least one path that includes the loop caused by (11,4).

Note that we must test paths that include both subpaths (3,4,5) and (3,5) even though neither of
these has V definitions. They must be included because they provide alternate du paths to the V
use on link (5,6). Although (7,4) is not used in the test set for variable V, it will be included in
the test set that covers the predicate uses of array variable V() and U.

The all-du-paths strategy is a strong criterion, but it does not take as many tests as it might seem
at first because any one test simultaneously satisfies the criterion for several definitions and
uses of several different variables.

All Uses Startegy (AU):The all uses strategy is that at least one definition clear path from
every definition of every variable to every use of that definition be exercised under some test.

Just as we reduced our ambitions by stepping down from all paths (P) to branch coverage (C2),
say, we can reduce the number of test cases by asking that the test set should include at least
one path segment from every definition to every use that can be reached by that definition.

For variable V: In Figure 3.11, ADUP requires that we include subpaths (3,4,5) and (3,5) in
some test because subsequent uses of V, such as on link (5,6), can be reached by either
alternative. In AU either (3,4,5) or (3,5) can be used to start paths, but we don't have to use both.
Similarly, we can skip the (8,10) link if we've included the (8,9,10) subpath.

Note the hole. We must include (8,9,10) in some test cases because that's the only way to reach
the c use at link (9,10) - but suppose our bug for variable V is on link (8,10) after all? Find a
covering set of paths under AU for Figure 3.11.

All p-uses/some c-uses strategy (APU+C) : For every variable and every definition of that
variable, include at least one definition free path from the definition to every predicate use;
if there are definitions of the variables that are not covered by the above prescription, then
add computational use test cases as required to cover every definition.
For variable Z:In Figure 3.10, for APU+C we can select paths that all take the upper link
(12,13) and therefore we do not cover the c-use of Z: but that's okay according to the strategy's
definition because every definition is covered.

Links (1,3), (4,5), (5,6), and (7,8) must be included because they contain definitions for
variable Z. Links (3,4), (3,5), (8,9), (8,10), (9,6), and (9,10) must be included because they
contain predicate uses of Z. Find a covering set of test cases under APU+C for all variables in
this example - it only takes two tests.

For variable V:In Figure 3.11, APU+C is achieved for V by

(1,3,5,6,7,8,10,11,4,5,6,7,8,10,11,12[upper], 13,2) and (1,3,5,6,7,8,10,11,12[lower], 13,2).
Note that the c-use at (9,10) need not be included under the APU+C criterion.

All c-uses/some p-uses strategy (ACU+P) : The all c-uses/some p-uses strategy (ACU+P) is to
first ensure coverage by computational use cases and if any definition is not covered by the
previously selected paths, add such predicate use cases as are needed to assure that every
definition is included in some test.

For variable Z: In Figure 3.10, ACU+P coverage is achieved for Z by path

(1,3,4,5,6,7,8,10, 11,12,13[lower], 2), but the predicate uses of several definitions are not
covered. Specifically, the (1,3) definition is not covered for the (3,5) p-use, the (7,8)
definition is not covered for the (8,9), (9,6) and (9, 10) p-uses.

The above examples imply that APU+C is stronger than branch coverage but ACU+P may
be weaker than, or incomparable to, branch coverage.

All Definitions Strategy (AD) : The all definitions strategy asks only every definition of every
variable be covered by atleast one use of that variable, be that use a computational use or a
predicate use.

FOR VARIABLE Z: Path (1,3,4,5,6,7,8, . . .) satisfies this criterion for variable Z, whereas any entry/exit
path satisfies it for variable V.
From the definition of this strategy we would expect it to be weaker than both ACU+P
and APU+C.

1. All Predicate Uses (APU), All Computational Uses (ACU) Strategies : The all predicate
uses strategy is derived from APU+C strategy by dropping the requirement that we include a c-
use for the variable if there are no p-uses for the variable. The all computational uses strategy is
derived from ACU+P strategy by dropping the requirement that we include a p-use for the
variable if there are no c-uses for the variable.

It is intuitively obvious that ACU should be weaker than ACU+P and that APU should
be weaker than APU+C.
ORDERING THE STRATEGIES:

Figure 3.12compares path-flow and data-flow testing strategies. The arrows denote that
the strategy at the arrow's tail is stronger than the strategy at the arrow's head

Figure 3.12: Relative Strength of Structural Test Strategies.

O The right-hand side of this graph, along the path from "all paths" to "all
statements" is the more interesting hierarchy for practical applications.
O Note that although ACU+P is stronger than ACU, both are incomparable to the
predicate-biased strategies. Note also that "all definitions" is not comparable to
ACU or APU.

SLICING AND DICING:

O A (static) program slice is a part of a program (e.g., a selected set of statements)

defined with respect to a given variable X (where X is a simple variable or a data
vector) and a statement i: it is the set of all statements that could (potentially,
under static analysis) affect the value of X at statement i - where the influence of a
faulty statement could result from an improper computational use or predicate use
of some other variables at prior statements.
O If X is incorrect at statement i, it follows that the bug must be in the program slice
for X with respect to i
O A program dice is a part of a slice in which all statements which are known to be
correct have been removed.
O In other words, a dice is obtained from a slice by incorporating information
obtained through testing or experiment (e.g., debugging).
 The debugger first limits her scope to those prior statements that could have
caused the faulty value at statement i (the slice) and then eliminates from
further consideration those statements that testing has shown to be correct.
O Debugging can be modeled as an iterative procedure in which slices
are further refined by dicing, where the dicing information is obtained from
ad hoc tests aimed primarily at eliminating possibilities. Debugging ends
when the dice has been reduced to the one faulty statement.

O Dynamic slicing is a refinement of static slicing in which only

statements on achievable paths to the statement in question are included.

APPLICATIONS OF DATA FLOW TESTING:

1. It is used to detect the different abnormalities that may arise due to data flow anomalies.
2. It shows the relationship between data objects that represents data.
3. It helps in determining the usage of variables that are included in test set.
4. It is cost effective.