About Us


  Process Models

  SE Resources


  Contact us

Breaking News!

A new blog ... visit OnCenter, Roger Pressman's running commentary on the world at large

A new edition ... the 6th edition of Software Engineering is available now

A first novel ... Roger Pressman's first novel is a technothriller -- The Aymara Bridge

A new training curriculum! RSP&A has partnered with QAI to develop a comprehensive Internet-based software engineering curriculum.

A redesigned Web site ... we've done a major redesign and added many new features

Adaptable Process Model
Conducting OO Testing

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The complete Adaptable Process Model (APM) is provided for informational purposes and for assessment by potential users. The APM is copyrighted material and may not be downloaded, copied, or extracted for use in actual project work. The full hypertext (html) version of the APM may be licensed for use and customization within your organization. Contact R.S. Pressman & Associates, Inc. for complete licensing information.

Conducting Object-Oriented Testing

    Object-oriented testing uses a number of strategies that are different than those used for conventional software. For this checklist, the more questions that elicit a negative response, the higher the risk that the OO testing approach will not achieve its objective of finding the maximum number of errors prior to delivery.

    • Does the object-relationship model properly reflect the collaboration represented in the CRC model?
    • Does each CRC index card properly represent delegation of responsibility to collaborators? Does the collaborator class properly perform the responsibility?
    • Has every request for service been validated to ensure that the collaborator does, in fact, perform the service?
    • Has each test case for a class been uniquely identified? Has the purpose of the test been stated?
    • Have all operations and messages to be tested as part of a class test been properly identified?
    • Has a list of "plausible faults" (SEPA, 5/e, p. 639) been identified for each class?
    • Have tests been defined to examine each plausible fault?
    • Have use cases been examined in an effort to define a series of scenario based tests? Have scenario-based tests been defined?
    • Have tests for surface structure (SEPA, 5/e, p. 643) been defined?
    • Have tests for deep structure (SEPA, 5/e, p. 643) been defined?
    • Have test cases derived using random tested been developed?
    • Have test cases derived using partition tested been developed?
    • Have tests been developed that will cause the state of a class to change?
    • Have tests been developed that will exercise all class functions?
    • Have tests that exercise communication between different classes been designed?
    • Has the behavioral model been used to derive test cases?

      Return to Checklist Table of Contents

Site search! We've added links to a search engine that will enable you to search our entire site for information you need. Enter the appropriate word or phrase below.


Home About us Products Product Models SE Resources Commentary Contact us

Web site and all contents R.S. Pressman & Associates, Inc. 2001 - 2006, All rights reserved.
Free website templates