CN111966598A - C + + Test customization method and aerospace model software code unit static analysis method - Google Patents
C + + Test customization method and aerospace model software code unit static analysis method Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN111966598A CN111966598A CN202010835152.9A CN202010835152A CN111966598A CN 111966598 A CN111966598 A CN 111966598A CN 202010835152 A CN202010835152 A CN 202010835152A CN 111966598 A CN111966598 A CN 111966598A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- coding rule
- rule set
- coding
- test
- static analysis
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 69
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 68
- 230000003068 static effect Effects 0.000 title claims abstract description 62
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 30
- 238000001514 detection method Methods 0.000 claims description 41
- 238000012163 sequencing technique Methods 0.000 claims description 7
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 claims description 6
- 244000141353 Prunus domestica Species 0.000 claims 1
- 238000012552 review Methods 0.000 description 4
- 230000007547 defect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000006870 function Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000009286 beneficial effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005206 flow analysis Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004807 localization Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000013442 quality metrics Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003252 repetitive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010998 test method Methods 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F11/00—Error detection; Error correction; Monitoring
- G06F11/36—Preventing errors by testing or debugging software
- G06F11/362—Software debugging
- G06F11/3628—Software debugging of optimised code
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Computer Hardware Design (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Stored Programmes (AREA)
Abstract
The invention discloses a C + + Test customizing method and a space model software code unit static analysis method, wherein the customizing method comprises the following steps of S01: cutting a coding rule set which is not suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit in the C + + Test; step S02: and cutting the rules in the plurality of coding rule sets which are suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code units after being cut in the step S01 to obtain the C + + Test suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code units. The method cuts the coding rule set which is not suitable for the static analysis of the space model software code unit in the C + + Test and the rules in the multiple coding rule sets, and improves the practicability of the C + + Test in the static analysis application of the space model software code specification and the static analysis efficiency of the code specification.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to a C + + Test customization method and a aerospace model software code unit static analysis method.
Background
The software unit test is a very efficient test method which finds more problems with the minimum cost in the existing various software test methods. Static analysis of software is one of effective methods for testing software units, and static analysis or static test is to detect software codes without running the software codes and detect whether the software codes meet relevant programming standards.
The most effective means for implementing the static analysis of the software is to use a static analysis tool, the static analysis tools which are applied to more military enterprises in China have LDRA Testbed, Klocwork, C + + Test and the like, and the C + + Test has certain advantages in the aspects of unit dynamic testing, coding rules, data flow analysis and the like, so the C + + Test becomes an application hotspot of the static analysis of the current military enterprises. However, the following problems occur in the static analysis application of the aerospace model software code specification by C + + Test: the method has the advantages that an inapplicable coding rule set exists, detection is not comprehensive enough by using a single coding rule, part of typical important software defects cannot be found, the same coding rule exists in a plurality of coding rule sets simultaneously, the requirements of the plurality of rule sets on the same coding rule are different, the same rule set also has different requirements on the same coding rule, the simultaneous use detection time of the plurality of coding rule sets is long, the cost of a review analysis result is obviously increased (particularly large-scale software), and the practicability of the C + + Test in the aerospace model software code specification static analysis application is greatly reduced, so that the static analysis efficiency is reduced.
Disclosure of Invention
In order to solve the technical problems in the prior art, the invention aims to provide a C + + Test customization method, which breaks through the limitation of low efficiency caused by poor practicability when a specific static analysis tool performs aerospace model software code specification static analysis, realizes the customization of a C + + Test code specification rule set for aerospace model software by combining the aerospace model software quality requirements and based on the existing code specification rule set aiming at the aerospace model software characteristics, and thus improves the practicability of the C + + Test in aerospace model software code specification static analysis application and the code specification static analysis efficiency.
In order to achieve the purpose of the invention, the C + + Test customization method provided by the invention comprises the following steps:
step S01: cutting a coding rule set which is not suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit in the C + + Test;
step S02: and cutting the rules in the plurality of coding rule sets which are suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code units after being cut in the step S01 to obtain the C + + Test suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code units.
The C + + Test comprises 1619 coding rules, and 25 coding rule sets in total, so that if all the coding rule sets are directly applied to static analysis of the aerospace model software unit, the efficiency and the quality are greatly reduced. The reason is that these coding rule sets are formulated either for a certain domain or for a certain class of coding problems to be applied. For example, the coding rule set Ellemtel is applied to the coding detection of C + + software in the telecommunication Industry, the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard coding rule set is a rule set formulated by referring to the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard, and the coding rule sets CWE-SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors and OWASP Top 10 Security Vulnerabilities are mainly used for the detection of network Security Vulnerabilities.
Further, the encoding rule set processed in step S02 is cut into encoding rule sets with the number of encoding rules being less than or equal to 150.
Further, the coding rule set suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit is subjected to application recommendation sequencing.
Further, fewer coding rules are in the top-ranked set of coding rules. The coding rules in the coding rule set sorted in the front are fewer, and the coding rule violation condition can be analyzed in a short time by aiming at large-scale software.
Further, the step S02 cuts the rules in the plurality of coding rule sets applicable to the static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit after being cut by the step S01 according to the GJB 8114-.
Further, the coding rule set suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit comprises a code repeatability detection coding rule set and an invalid code detection coding rule set for detecting the target software code redundant code.
Further, the coding rule set suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit comprises a vulnerability detection coding rule set.
Further, the coding rule set suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit comprises a vulnerability detection coding rule set, a code repeatability detection coding rule set, an invalid code detection coding rule set, a unit test quality measurement coding rule set, a mandatory rule coding rule set shared by C and C + +, a suggested rule coding rule set shared by C and C + +, a CRules coding rule set, an Effective C + + coding rule set, a mandatory rule coding rule set dedicated by C + +, a suggested rule coding rule set dedicated by C + +, an Effective STL coding rule set and a MISRA C + + 2008 coding rule set, or any combination thereof.
The invention also aims to provide a static analysis method for the space model software code unit, which utilizes the C + + Test customized by the customization method to perform static analysis on the target software code.
The beneficial effects of the invention include:
1) the method cuts the coding rule set which is not suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit in the C + + Test and the rules in the multiple coding rule sets to obtain the C + + Test which is suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit, breaks through the limitation of low efficiency caused by poor practicability when a specific static analysis tool carries out aerospace model software code specification static analysis, combines the quality requirements of aerospace model software according to the characteristics of the aerospace model software, realizes the customization of the C + + Test code specification rule set for the aerospace model software based on the existing code specification rule set, and improves the practicability of the C + + Test in the aerospace model software code specification static analysis application and the code specification static analysis efficiency.
2) The code is analyzed by adopting a small number of coding rule sets, so that the detection time is shortened, and the cost of a review analysis result is reduced.
3) The application sequencing is customized, and when detection is performed by detection personnel, the detection personnel operate according to the application sequencing, so that the problems that the detection time is long due to the simultaneous use of a plurality of coding rule sets, and the cost of a review analysis result is high are solved.
4) By running different coding rule sets in the C + + Test provided by the invention, different coding rule violation conditions can be detected by applying different serial number coding rule sets, so that the number of detection result items to be analyzed by software developers is reduced, and more time and energy are put on important code problems.
5) By using the code repeatability detection coding rule set and the invalid code detection coding rule set, redundant codes such as repeated codes or invalid codes generated by software inheritance, common maintenance of the same software by multiple persons and multiple changes (input file change and test change) in code development can be effectively detected.
6) A plurality of coding rule sets are used for detection, and the problems that detection is not comprehensive enough by using a single coding rule, and part of typical important software code defects cannot be discovered are solved.
Drawings
The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate embodiments consistent with the invention and together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention. It is obvious that the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the invention, and that for a person skilled in the art, other drawings can be derived from them without inventive effort. In the drawings:
fig. 1 is a flowchart of a C + + Test customization method according to the present invention.
Detailed Description
Example embodiments will now be described more fully with reference to the accompanying drawings. Example embodiments may, however, be embodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the examples set forth herein; rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will be thorough and complete, and will fully convey the concept of example embodiments to those skilled in the art.
The C + + Test customization method provided by the application comprises the following steps:
step S01: cutting a coding rule set which is not suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit in the C + + Test; these rule sets in C + + Test include 12 sets of coding Rules, CWE-SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors, Ellemtel, ISO 26262 Recommanded Rules, OWASP Top 10 Security Vulnerabilites, Payment Card Industry Security Standard, Parasoft Recommanded Rules, Parasoft's Recommanded FDA + + C Phase 1, Parasoft's Recommanded FDA C + + Phase 2, SAMANnex A Source weather Weaknesses, SecurityRules, Sutter-Alexandersecu, The Power of Ten.
Step S02: cutting the rules in the plurality of coding rule sets which are suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code units after being cut in the step S01 to obtain C + + tests suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code units; the step includes the following three conditions when cutting is carried out:
1) the same coding rule exists in a plurality of coding rule sets at the same time, is reserved in a single coding rule set, and is cut out from the same coding rule existing in the plurality of coding rule sets;
2) the multiple coding rule sets have different requirements on the same coding rule, and the coding rule requirements are unified;
3) the same coding rule set has different requirements on the same coding rule, and the coding rule requirements are unified.
In this document, the coding rules are tailored according to "GJB 8114-. The method is characterized in that a total of 5 rule sets including a mandatory criterion shared by C and C + +, a proposed criterion shared by C and C + +, a mandatory criterion dedicated by C + +, a proposed criterion dedicated by C + +, and GJB5369 are customized according to a GJB 8114-. The customized unit test quality measurement coding rule set comprises 8 coding rules according to model software internal test requirements (Q/QJB 157 and 2008) established by group companies. The problem of inconsistent requirements of the coding rules is solved by cutting the codes of the coding rules, and the localization of the coding rules is completed, so that the practicability of the C + + Test and the static analysis efficiency of the code specification are improved.
The software code is easy to generate partial redundant code in development, and the main reason is that due to the inheritance of software, multiple persons write the same software together, and the code is changed for multiple times, including the code change in a test and the change of design input; the types of redundant codes mainly include unused local variables, repetitive codes, and invalid codes. In order to detect redundant codes in software codes, a code repeatability detection coding rule set and an invalid code detection coding rule set are customized in C + + Test and are used for detecting the redundant codes of target software codes.
In order to avoid the important problems caused by the code under the condition of not running the code program, a bug detection coding rule set is customized in C + + Test and used for detecting the important problems caused by the code under the condition of not running the code program, so that the important problems are avoided. Significant issues noted herein include, but are not limited to, variable un-initialized usage, invalid memory allocation, references to null pointers, array and buffer overflows, divide by zero, memory and resource leaks, etc.
Since the analysis time is longer when analyzing a larger software code, the encoding rule set with excessive encoding rules is cut into a smaller number of encoding rule sets by the present document after the processing of step S02. When a smaller number of coding rule sets are used for analyzing the software codes, the analysis time is reduced, especially when large-scale software codes are analyzed.
A smaller number of encoding rule sets as described herein refers to an encoding rule set that includes a smaller number of encoding rules. In this document, a coding rule set including 150 or less coding rules is set as a smaller number of coding rule sets, but there is no standard determination on how many coding rules are small, and the determination needs to be made according to the analyzed software code size, for example, for software with a code size of about 6 ten thousand, the time (tool analysis time and software developer review time) needed to execute one rule set of 150 coding rules is probably much. For 1 million pieces of software, the time required to execute a rule set of 150 encoding rules may not require much time.
In order to facilitate the use of software developers and save the time of the software developers, the application recommendation sequencing is carried out on the coding rule set suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit. Software developers can sequentially execute the coding rule sets according to the customized application recommendation sequence, and certainly, the software developers can also determine the execution sequence of the coding rule sets according to the conditions of target software codes, so that important and common code problems can be detected preferentially.
Software developers can simply run and use a certain coding rule set comprising different coding rules to detect software according to specific conditions, and the violation conditions of the different coding rules can be detected by the application of the coding rule sets with different serial numbers, so that the number of detection result items to be analyzed by the software developers is reduced, and more time and energy are paid to important code problems.
When applying the recommended ordering to the encoding rule sets, the encoding rules in two adjacent encoding rule sets may be partially the same or completely different. When the coding rules in two adjacent coding rule sets are completely different, and a software developer runs the coding rules according to the recommended sorting sequence, the violation condition of different coding rules can be detected by applying coding rule sets with different sequence numbers, the number of detection result items to be analyzed by the software developer is reduced, and more time and energy are put on important code problems.
Here, the coding rule set ordered at the front is customized to less coding rules, and the coding rule violation condition can be analyzed in a shorter time.
In this context, the ordinal number precedes the rank of the rule set, and the rank is based on the importance of the rule set, the common use, and the number of the encoding rule sets.
Here, the coding rule set ordered before may be set as the coding rule set ordered before 5 in accordance with circumstances, or may be set as the coding rule set ordered before 10 in the recommended order or other numbers.
The coding rule set in the customized C + + Test includes one or any combination of a vulnerability detection coding rule set, a code repeatability detection coding rule set, an invalid code detection coding rule set, a unit Test quality measurement coding rule set, a mandatory rule coding rule set shared by C and C + +, a proposed rule coding rule set shared by C and C + +, a CRules coding rule set, an Effective C + + coding rule set, a mandatory rule coding rule set dedicated to C + +, a proposed rule coding rule set dedicated to C + +, an Effective STL coding rule set, and a MISRA C + + 2008 coding rule set. Wherein, the unit testing quality measurement coding rule set is customized according to the internal testing requirements (Q/QJB 157-2008) of model software established by group companies; the method comprises the steps of designing a C and C + + common mandatory criterion coding rule set, a C and C + + common proposed criterion coding rule set, a C + + dedicated mandatory criterion coding rule set and a C + + dedicated proposed criterion coding rule set according to a GJB 8114 and 2013C C + + language programming security subset, a GJB5369 and 2005 aerospace model software C security subset and a model software internal test requirement (Q/QJB 157 and 2008) formulated by group companies, wherein the C and C + + common proposed criterion coding rule set are customized.
The type, number and application ordering of the coding rule sets in the customized C + + Test can be customized according to the target software code type. For example, based on the software code of C language, the name of the encoding rule set, the number of encoding rules and the application sequence are shown in Table 1; the C + + language-based software code, the coding rule set name, the number of coding rules, and the application ordering are shown in table 2.
TABLE 1 encoding rule set name, number of encoding rules and application sequencing Table (C language)
| Encoding rule set names | Number of encoding rules |
| Vulnerability detection | 25 |
| Code repeatability detection | 4 |
| Invalid code detection | 17 |
| Unit test quality metric | 8 |
| Mandatory guidelines common to C and C + | 121 |
| CRules | 63 |
| C and C + + common recommendation criteria | 27 |
| GJB5369 | 126 |
Table 2 encoding rule set name, encoding rule number and application ordering table (C + + language)
The vulnerability detection, the code repeatability detection, the invalid code detection, the unit test quality measurement, the mandatory rule shared by C and C + + and the proposed rule shared by C and C + + in tables 1 and 2 are all applicable to the C, C + + programmed software, and the C and C + + mixed programmed software can be selected according to its own needs from two customized static analysis coding rule sets according to the ordering. For the encoding rule set Effective STL, when a C + + standard template library function is used in software, the encoding rule set is recommended to be adopted for static analysis. If the C + + standard template library function is not used in the software, the C + + standard template library function is not adopted, so that the static analysis time is saved, and the test efficiency is improved.
Software developers recommend to execute the corresponding coding rule sets according to the applications in the tables 1 and 2, firstly execute the vulnerability detection rule sets, detect whether the codes have an array boundary crossing problem, and then do not check and analyze the data boundary crossing problem when executing other coding rule sets. If an undefined encoding rule set is used, a single encoding rule set may have some important software defects that cannot be found, and multiple encoding rule sets may be used simultaneously with a long analysis time and a high false alarm rate. Meanwhile, software developers carry out software code analysis according to application sequencing, and compared with the traditional method that a plurality of coding rule sets (non-customized) provided by C + + Test do not know how to get the next time, the method is higher in efficiency.
The C + + Test customized by the C + + Test customizing method is mainly used for static analysis of the aerospace model software code specification, and the static analysis efficiency of the aerospace model software code specification is improved.
The present disclosure has been described in terms of the above-described embodiments, which are merely exemplary of the implementations of the present disclosure. It must be noted that the disclosed embodiments do not limit the scope of the disclosure. Rather, variations and modifications are possible within the spirit and scope of the disclosure, and these are all within the scope of the disclosure.
Claims (11)
1. A C + + Test customization method is characterized by comprising the following steps:
step S01: cutting a coding rule set which is not suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit in the C + + Test;
step S02: and cutting the rules in the plurality of coding rule sets which are suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code units after being cut in the step S01 to obtain the C + + Test suitable for the static analysis of the aerospace model software code units.
2. The C + + Test customization method according to claim 1, wherein: the step S02 prunes rules in the plurality of sets of coding rules applicable to the static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit pruned in step S01 according to the following:
1) the same coding rule exists in a plurality of coding rule sets at the same time, is reserved in a single coding rule set, and is cut out from the same coding rule existing in the plurality of coding rule sets;
2) the multiple coding rule sets have different requirements on the same coding rule, and the coding rule requirements are unified;
3) the same coding rule set has different requirements on the same coding rule, and the coding rule requirements are unified.
3. The C + + Test customization method according to claim 1, wherein: and cutting the coding rule set processed in the step S02 into coding rule sets with the number of the coding rules less than or equal to 150.
4. The C + + Test customization method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein: and performing application recommendation sequencing on the coding rule set suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit.
5. The C + + Test customization method according to claim 4, wherein: there are fewer coding rules in the top-ranked set of coding rules.
6. The C + + Test customization method according to claim 4, wherein: the coding rules in two adjacent sets of coding rules are different.
7. The C + + Test customization method according to claim 1, wherein: the step S02 tailors rules in the multiple sets of coding rules applicable to the static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit tailored by the step S01 according to the GJB 8114 & 2013C C + + language programming security subset and the GJB5369 & 2005 aerospace model software C language security subset.
8. The C + + Test customization method according to claim 1, wherein: the coding rule set suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit comprises a code repeatability detection coding rule set and an invalid code detection coding rule set used for detecting the target software code redundant code.
9. The C + + Test customization method according to claim 1, wherein: the coding rule set suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit comprises a vulnerability detection coding rule set.
10. The C + + Test customization method according to claim 1, wherein: the coding rule set suitable for static analysis of the aerospace model software code unit comprises a vulnerability detection coding rule set, a code repeatability detection coding rule set, an invalid code detection coding rule set, a unit test quality measurement coding rule set, a mandatory rule coding rule set shared by C and C + +, a proposed rule coding rule set shared by C and C + +, a CRules coding rule set, an Effective C + + coding rule set, a forced rule coding rule set special for C + +, a proposed rule coding rule set special for C + +, an Effective STL coding rule set and one or any combination of MISRA C + + 2008 coding rule sets.
11. A static analysis method for a space model software code unit is characterized by comprising the following steps: static analysis of the object software code using the C + + Test customized by the customization method according to any one of claims 1-10.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010835152.9A CN111966598A (en) | 2020-08-19 | 2020-08-19 | C + + Test customization method and aerospace model software code unit static analysis method |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010835152.9A CN111966598A (en) | 2020-08-19 | 2020-08-19 | C + + Test customization method and aerospace model software code unit static analysis method |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN111966598A true CN111966598A (en) | 2020-11-20 |
Family
ID=73389374
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202010835152.9A Pending CN111966598A (en) | 2020-08-19 | 2020-08-19 | C + + Test customization method and aerospace model software code unit static analysis method |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN111966598A (en) |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN112597446A (en) * | 2020-12-14 | 2021-04-02 | 中国航发控制系统研究所 | Method for screening safety subset of safety key software modeling language |
Citations (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN109614079A (en) * | 2018-11-21 | 2019-04-12 | 中国航空无线电电子研究所 | A kind of coding rule inspection system towards avionics field |
-
2020
- 2020-08-19 CN CN202010835152.9A patent/CN111966598A/en active Pending
Patent Citations (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN109614079A (en) * | 2018-11-21 | 2019-04-12 | 中国航空无线电电子研究所 | A kind of coding rule inspection system towards avionics field |
Non-Patent Citations (2)
| Title |
|---|
| 杨丰源等: "面向C／C++的静态测试技术应用研究", 《工业控制计算机》, vol. 32, no. 6, 30 June 2019 (2019-06-30), pages 23 - 24 * |
| 王泉;: "规范化嵌入式软件自测试方法", 计算机工程与设计, vol. 34, no. 10, pages 2480 - 2485 * |
Cited By (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN112597446A (en) * | 2020-12-14 | 2021-04-02 | 中国航发控制系统研究所 | Method for screening safety subset of safety key software modeling language |
| CN112597446B (en) * | 2020-12-14 | 2023-07-25 | 中国航发控制系统研究所 | Screening method of safety key software modeling language safety subset |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN107819627B (en) | System fault processing method and server | |
| US20100262866A1 (en) | Cross-concern code coverage assessment | |
| US8645761B2 (en) | Precise fault localization | |
| US8006138B2 (en) | Software quality assessment based on semantic similarities | |
| CN112035359B (en) | Program testing method and device, electronic equipment and storage medium | |
| CN114546738B (en) | Universal test method, system, terminal and storage medium for server | |
| Shahid et al. | A study on test coverage in software testing | |
| CN108897678B (en) | Static code detection method, static code detection system and storage device | |
| CN111966598A (en) | C + + Test customization method and aerospace model software code unit static analysis method | |
| CN113392000B (en) | Test case execution result analysis method, device, equipment and storage medium | |
| CN113886373A (en) | Data processing method and device and electronic equipment | |
| Ammar et al. | Enhanced weighted method for test case prioritization in regression testing using unique priority value | |
| CN115145751A (en) | Method, device, equipment and storage medium for positioning fault root cause of micro-service system | |
| US20140281719A1 (en) | Explaining excluding a test from a test suite | |
| Sun et al. | MAF: method-anchored test fragmentation for test code plagiarism detection | |
| Bodhe et al. | Diagnostic Fail Data Minimization Using an $ N $-Cover Algorithm | |
| CN113791980B (en) | Conversion analysis method, device and equipment for test cases and storage medium | |
| CN115576831A (en) | Test case recommendation method, device, equipment and storage medium | |
| CN115033489A (en) | Code resource detection method and device, electronic equipment and storage medium | |
| CN102012816B (en) | Method and device for generating IDE engineering file and solution file | |
| CN114328161A (en) | Java interface test method and device, storage medium and electronic equipment | |
| CN106650136A (en) | Method for detecting functional consistency of standard units of timing library and netlist library | |
| Piancó et al. | Code change history and software vulnerabilities | |
| CN112631852A (en) | Macro checking method, macro checking device, electronic equipment and computer readable storage medium | |
| CN111881055A (en) | Simulink model design method for military software evaluation specification |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination |