1 / 18

Predicting Class Testability using Object-Oriented Metrics

Predicting Class Testability using Object-Oriented Metrics. M. Bruntink and A. van Deursen Presented by Tom Chappell. Goal. To assess the capability of certain object-oriented metrics to predict class testability Useful for: Planning Design Monitoring. Source Code Metrics.

raven-glenn
Download Presentation

Predicting Class Testability using Object-Oriented Metrics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Predicting Class Testability using Object-Oriented Metrics M. Bruntink and A. van Deursen Presented by Tom Chappell

  2. Goal • To assess the capability of certain object-oriented metrics to predict class testability • Useful for: • Planning • Design • Monitoring

  3. Source Code Metrics • LOCC – Lines of Code Per Class • The number of lines of source code,not including blank lines and comments • FOUT – Fan Out • The number of classes used by a class

  4. Source Code Metrics • NOM – Number of Methods • Counts the number of new methods declared by a class • Does not count methods inherited from superclass, even if overridden

  5. Source Code Metrics • NOF – Number of Fields • Counts the number of new fields(class variables and member variables) declared by a class • Does not count fields inherited from superclass

  6. Source Code Metrics • RFC – Response for Class • The number of methods in a class (including inherited methods) plus the number of methods of other classes invoked by that class

  7. Source Code Metrics • DIT – Depth of Inheritance Tree • The number of ancestors of a class • NOC – Number of Children Classes • Counts only the immediate subclasses,not all descendents

  8. Source Code Metrics • WMC – Weighted Methods per Class • The total of McCabe’s Cyclomatic Complexity for each method implemented by the class • Cyclomatic Complexity is the number of distinct execution paths in the method

  9. Source Code Metrics • LCOM – Lack of Cohesion of Methods • 0: every field of the class is used byevery method of the class (Lower Bound) • 1: every field of the class is used by one method of the class • n / (n-1): no field of the class is used by any of the n methods of the class (Upper Bound) • Defined for classes with at least 1 field andat least 2 methods

  10. Test Suite Metrics • dLOCC – Lines of Code for [Test] Class • The number of lines of source code in a test class, not including blank lines and comments • dNOTC – Number of Test Cases • The number of times that a test classcalls a JUnit assert method.

  11. Case Studies • DocGen • Commercial documentation generator • 90,000 lines of Java code • 640 classes (138 with associated test classes) • Developed with XP methodology • Coding standard: method not allowed to exceed 12 lines

  12. Case Studies • Apache Ant • Open Source build tool (similar to “make”) • 170,000 lines of Java code • 887 classes (111 with associated test classes)

  13. Results • Strong Predictors of High dLOCC(Lines of [Test] Class Code): • RFC – Response for Class • LOCC – Lines of [Source] Class Code • FOUT – Fan Out • WMC – Weighted Method Count • NOM – Number of Methods • NOF – Number of Fields

  14. Results • Strong Predictors of High dNOTC(Number of Test Cases): • RFC – Response for Class(DocGen Only) • LOCC – Lines of [Source] Class Code(DocGen Only)

  15. Results • LCOM – Lack of Cohesion of Methods • Moderately correlated to dLOCC/dNOTC in Ant • Much less strongly correlated in DocGen • DocGen’s “12 lines per method” coding standard increases LCOM

  16. Comments • Choice of Correlation Statistic • The authors use Spearman’s rank-order correlation coefficient ( rs ) • This measures only rank-order correlation (“the class with the 13th-highest number of LOCC had the 13th-highest dLOCC”) • The degree that a change in LOCC would cause to change in dLOCC is not measured

  17. Comments • Suggested Metric: %Interface Fan Out • Measures the percentage of fan-out references that refer to interfaces,rather than to classes • Designing APIs to use interfaces makes classes more flexible and makes it easier for the unit test to set up a test environment using test stub classes that implement required interfaces

  18. Questions?

More Related