Prev | Current Page 263 | Next

Peter Farrell-Vinay

"Manage Software Testing"

Similarly if bugs can be traced
to the use or non-use of some tool, such a relationship can provide management with new
insights.
5. What was done wrong? This can be partly answered by using the classification shown in Appendix
C. A fuller answer can be derived from the following questions:
a. Why was the bug made? Answers to this question are central to improving the software project
process. See section 15.7.1 as a means of analyzing the operations most likely to expose bugs.
Those bugs remaining in the system for more than one phase provoke the further question:
why wasn??™t the bug found earlier?
b. In which phase was the bug made?
c. How often should the bug have been caught by a test?
d. Which test(s) should have caught it?
e. Which review should have caught it?
f. Which bugs were related to it?
g. Which test group found it (if there is more than one)?
6. Which program constructs have to be changed most frequently? (See section 13.6 for more on
this).
7. What is the relationship between the bugs? (An analysis of the circumstances likely to cause the
bug. See section 15.7.1 for an example.)
8. What could have been done to prevent this bug? This is an antidote to the pious hand-wringing
that frequently succeeds a major problem.
108 Manage Software Testing
9. Which test approach (could have) found this bug? The answers to this question help us decide:
a. Which testing methods are most effective at finding what kind of bug
b.


Pages:
251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275