JP2016110327A - Test case specification joining program, method, and device - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To efficiently determine a combination of valid test cases.SOLUTION: Test cases included in a plurality of test case specifications in which sequence is previously determined are classified into a normal case and an abnormal case. Processes (S14, S16) for acquiring, from among combinations of test cases specified on the basis of a sequence and a kind of classified test case, a combination of test cases which includes a condition clause not included in a set of selected condition clauses Cand in which the number of such clauses is largest, a process (S20) for determining by a SAT solver whether the acquired combination of test cases is satisfiable, and a process (S26) for adding the condition clauses included in the acquired combination of test cases to the set of selected condition clauses C, are repeated (S28) until the condition clauses included in the set of selected condition clauses Cand the condition clauses included in a set of all condition clauses Cmatch, with a combination of test cases found to be satisfiable outputted (S32).SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 6

Description

  The present invention relates to a test case specification combination program, method, and apparatus.

  2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, in integration testing, a technique is known in which a test case specification is generated from each of a plurality of system specifications and a single integrated test specification is generated by combining these test case specifications.

JP 2012-185642 A

  When combining test case specifications, it is common to check the satisfiability of all combinations of test cases included in all test case specifications to improve completeness. For this reason, when there are many specifications or when the specifications include many test cases, the number of combinations becomes enormous (explodes), and there is a possibility that the processing will take a long time or the processing may fail.

  In addition, when the system specifications include test cases classified as normal or abnormal (for example, check specifications), a combination of test cases that should actually be invalid can be included in the integrated test specifications. There is sex.

  In one aspect, an object of the present invention is to provide a test case specification combination program, method, and apparatus capable of efficiently determining effective test case combinations.

  In one aspect, the test case specification combination program is a test case specification combination program for combining a plurality of test case specifications having a predetermined order, and the test cases included in the plurality of test case specifications. Is stored in a storage unit for storing acquired conditional clauses from combinations of test cases identified based on the order and the types of the classified test cases. A process for acquiring a combination of test cases including the conditional clauses that are not stored and having the largest number of conditional clauses not stored in the storage unit, and determining whether the acquired combination of test cases is a satisfactory combination The process and the process of storing the conditional clause included in the acquired combination of the test cases in the storage unit can be repeated until a predetermined timing is satisfied. Output a combination of the test cases determined to be combined, cause the computer to execute processing, and at the predetermined timing, the conditional clauses stored in the storage unit are all included in the plurality of test case specifications. This is a test case specification combination program that has the same timing as the conditional clause.

  An efficient combination of test cases can be determined.

It is a bell showing the hardware configuration of the integrated test apparatus according to an embodiment. It is a functional block diagram of an integrated test apparatus. It is a figure which shows the integrated test content of the usage scenario of ATM. It is a figure which shows the example of the test case specification for performing the integration test of FIG. FIG. 3 is a detailed functional block diagram of a test case specification combining unit in FIG. 2. It is a flowchart which shows the process of a test case specification coupling | bond part. FIG. 7A to FIG. 7C are diagrams for explaining the test case specifications used in the explanation of FIG. It is a figure for demonstrating the process of a pre-processing part. It is a figure for demonstrating step S10 of FIG. FIG. 10A is a diagram for explaining a method for acquiring a combination of test cases, and FIG. 10B is a table in which the priority order of FIG. FIG. 7 is a diagram (No. 1) for describing the processing in steps S12 to S32 in FIG. 6; FIG. 7 is a diagram (No. 2) for explaining the processing in steps S12 to S32 in FIG. 6; It is a figure which shows the process outline | summary of a comparative example. It is FIG. (1) which shows the test case combination produced | generated in a comparative example. It is FIG. (2) which shows the test case combination produced | generated in a comparative example. It is a figure which shows the combination extracted after a SAT solver in a comparative example, and all the conditional clause sets created from this combination. It is a figure for demonstrating the check of the test case combination in a comparative example. FIG. 18A is a diagram showing an output in the comparative example, and FIG. 18B is a table comparing the comparative example with the embodiment. It is a figure which shows that the invalid combination is contained in the output of a comparative example.

  Hereinafter, an embodiment of the integrated test apparatus will be described in detail with reference to FIGS. The integration test apparatus 10 of the present embodiment is an apparatus that automatically generates an integration test (IT) specification from a plurality of system (SS: System Specification) specifications for a financial system.

  FIG. 1 shows a hardware configuration of an integrated test apparatus 10 as a test case specification combining apparatus according to an embodiment. As shown in FIG. 1, the integrated test apparatus 10 includes a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 90, a ROM (Read Only Memory) 92, a RAM (Random Access Memory) 94, and a storage unit (here, an HDD (Hard Disk Drive)) 96. A network interface 97, a display unit 93, an input unit 95, a portable storage medium drive 99, and the like. Each component of the integrated test apparatus 10 is connected to a bus 98. In the integrated test apparatus 10, a program stored in the ROM 92 or the HDD 96 (including a test case specification combining program) or a program read from the portable storage medium 91 by the portable storage medium drive 99 (test case specification combining) The function shown in FIG. 2 is realized by the CPU 90 executing (including a program).

  FIG. 2 shows a functional block diagram of the integrated test apparatus 10. In the integrated test apparatus 10, functions as a program conversion unit 12, a test case specification generation unit 14, a test case specification combination unit 16, and an IT specification conversion unit 18 are realized by the CPU 90 executing a program. .

  The program conversion unit 12 converts each SS specification (for example, EXCEL data) into a Java (registered trademark) program.

  The test case specification generation unit 14 analyzes a Java (registered trademark) program using a symbolic execution technique, and generates a test case specification (XML data).

  The test case specification combining unit 16 extracts satisfiable combinations from the combinations of test cases included in all the test case specifications, and outputs them as combined test case specifications. Details of the test case specification combining unit 16 will be described later.

  The IT specification conversion unit 18 converts the combined test case specification (XML data) into an IT specification (for example, EXCEL data) that can be understood by humans.

  Here, an example of the test case specification in the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIGS.

  FIG. 3 shows the contents of an integration test of an ATM (Automated Teller Machine) usage scenario, and FIG. 4 shows an example of a test case specification for executing the integration test of FIG. As shown in FIG. 3, there are six types of integration test check items (passbook, card, transaction, password, amount, and error), and the possible check contents are determined for each check item. In this example, as shown in FIG. 4, there are three test case specifications (X, Y, Z), where X and Y are check system specifications, and Z is an update system specification. Here, the check system specifications check various conditions of the system state and user input, and divide into normal cases and abnormal cases according to the check results. On the other hand, the update system specification is for checking various conditions of the system state and user input and updating the system state and user input value according to the check result. The order of each test case specification is determined in advance, and in this example, X → Y → Z. Further, the test case specification X has nine test cases, the test case specification Y has four test cases, and the test case specification Z has four test cases.

  For example, in the case of the test case specification X, ID = X01 and X02 indicate that in the passbook entry, an error occurs if no passbook is inserted regardless of the presence or absence of a card. Further, ID = X03 to X06 indicates that, in depositing, it is possible to deposit either or both of a card and a passbook, but an error occurs if both the card and the passbook are not present. In addition, ID = X07 to X09 indicates that in the case of withdrawal, an error occurs if a card is not inserted regardless of whether there is a bankbook, and an error occurs even if the password is not correct.

  In the case of the test case specification Y, ID = Y01 and Y02 indicate that an error occurs if the amount exceeds 500,000 yen in the case of withdrawal. Further, ID = Y03, Y04 indicates that an error occurs if the deposit exceeds 1 million yen.

  Further, in the case of the test case specification Z, ID = Z01 to Z04 indicates that the update process varies depending on the conditions.

  FIG. 5 shows a specific functional block diagram of the test case specification combining unit 16 of FIG. As shown in FIG. 5, the test case specification combining unit 16 includes a preprocessing unit 20 as a classification unit, a test case combination acquisition unit 22, a satisfiability determination unit 24, and a post-processing unit 26 as an output unit. The function of the processing unit is realized including the test case combination acquisition unit 22 and the satisfiability determination unit 24.

The preprocessing unit 20 reads the test case specification (XML data) output from the test case specification generation unit 14 and analyzes the conditions. The preprocessing unit 20 divides each test case included in the test case specification into a normal case and an abnormal case. In addition, the preprocessing unit 20 creates a set of conditional clauses (all conditional clause set C _all ) included in all test cases.

  The test case combination acquisition unit 22 creates a combination of test cases one by one, and acquires the combination as a combination that performs satisfiability determination when the combination satisfies a predetermined condition.

  The satisfiability determination unit 24 converts the test case combination acquired by the test case combination acquisition unit 22 into a mathematical code for executing a SAT solver (SATisfiability Solver). Further, the satisfiability determination unit 24 receives the mathematical code for executing the SAT solver, executes the SAT solver, and extracts combinations that become satisfiable (SAT). Here, the SAT solver is Yices or the like, and a satisfiability is determined by analyzing given conditions and expressions. In this case, the SAT solver outputs satisfiable (SAT) when at least one interpretation, model, or value set satisfying the given condition or expression is found, and unsatisfiable (UNSAT) when it is not found. Output.

  The post-processing unit 26 normalizes satisfactory test case combinations by organizing test case IDs, etc., converts the normalized test case combinations into XML data, and sends them to the IT specification conversion unit 18. Output.

  Next, processing executed by the test case specification combining unit 16 of this embodiment will be described in detail along the flowchart of FIG. As a premise of the processing in FIG. 6, it is assumed that a test case specification as shown in FIG. 7A is input from the test case specification generation unit 14. Specifically, there are three types of test case specifications, X, Y, and Z, where X and Y are check system specifications and Z is an update system specification. The order of the test case usage documents is in the order of X → Y → Z, and the number of generated test cases (the number of test cases included in the test case specification) is 4 for X, 4 for Y, Z is 3.

  Further, it is assumed that the conditions for each test case in the test case specification (ID and conditional expression of the test case after the XML analysis by the preprocessing unit 20) are as shown in FIG. In practice, the conditional expression is often an expression as shown in FIG. 4, but in the present embodiment, as shown in FIG. 7B, a variable ( A, B ...) is used. The variables included in each condition in FIG. 7B are as shown in the variable type / value list in FIG. 7C. In the example of FIG. 7B, error = 0 means normal and error = 1 means abnormal. Further, since the test case specification Z is an updated specification, there is no error clause for dividing the normal case and the abnormal case.

Further, the preprocessing unit 20 divides each test case included in the test case specification into a normal case and an abnormal case before the processing of FIG. In this case, based on the error clause included in each test case, the preprocessing unit 20 converts the test case shown in FIG. 8A into a normal case (upper stage) and an abnormal case as shown in FIG. Divide into (lower). Since the test case specification Z is an update specification, all test cases are normal cases. Also, the error clause of each test case is deleted from each condition after the division. At the time when the processing of FIG. 6 is started, the selected conditional clause set C _selected is left empty (see the top row in FIG. 11). In the selected conditional clause set C _selected , conditional clauses included in the test case combination acquired by the test case combination acquisition unit 22 are stored as needed. It should be noted that the above processing is not necessary when the case is divided into a normal case and an abnormal case in advance.

In the process of FIG. 6, first, in step S10, the preprocessing unit 20 sets the union of all condition clauses as the all condition clause set C _all . Specifically, as shown by attaching (1) to (6) in FIG. 9, the conditional clauses included in each test case are extracted, and the union is set as an all conditional clause set C _all .

Next, in step S12, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires the next combination. Here, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires the next combination under the following conditions.
(A) A combination of test cases including many normal cases is given priority.
(B) Among the conditional clauses included in the test case combination, a combination having a large number of conditional clauses not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected is preferentially selected.
(C) The following combination is acquired under the condition that a combination including an empty abnormal case is empty.

  When the condition (A) is applied, “X_normal → Y_normal → Z_normal” has the highest priority as shown in (1) of FIG. The next priority is “X_normal → Y_normal → Z_abnormal”, but Z_abnormal is empty, so the combination is empty from the condition (C). The next priority is “X_normal → Y_abnormal”, and the next priority is “X_abnormal”. FIG. 10B is a table summarizing the priority order when the conditions (A) and (C) are applied.

  Accordingly, in step S12, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires one of the most prioritized combinations of “X_normal → Y_normal → Z_normal” (here, X01 → Y01 → Z01 (reference numeral in FIG. 11). (See (S12-1)) In the following, a combination of test cases is expressed as “X01Y01Z01”.

Next, in step S14, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires a union C _comb of conditional clauses. In this case, "A = 1 & B <100 & C! =" P "& C! =" Q "&B> 0 & D = true" is acquired as C _comb in the test case combination X01Y01Z01. (See symbol (S14-1) in FIG. 11).

Next, in step S <b> 16, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 determines whether C _comb combC _selected . That is, it is determined whether or not all the conditional clauses included in the test case combination are included in the conditional clauses included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected . Here, since C _selected is empty, the determination is denied and the process proceeds to step S18. If the determination in step S16 is affirmative, the process proceeds to step S12.

  If transfering it to step S18, the test case combination acquisition part 22 will combine conditions. Next, in step S20, the satisfiability determination unit 24 performs satisfiability determination of the combined conditions using a SAT solver. Here, it is assumed that the result of the SAT solver is SAT, as indicated by reference numeral (S20-1) in FIG.

  Next, in step S22, the satisfiability determination unit 24 determines whether the result of the SAT solver is SAT. If the determination is negative, the process proceeds to step S12. If the determination is positive, the process proceeds to step S24.

In step S24, the satisfiability determining unit 24 adds the test case combination to the output test case combination (see the reference sign (S24-1) in FIG. 11). Next, in step S26, the satisfiability determining unit 24 adds a conditional clause that does not exist in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected among the conditional clauses included in the combination of test cases to C _selected . In this case, all of the union C _combs of the conditional clauses acquired in step S14 are added to the _selected conditional clause set C _selected (see reference numeral (S26-1) in FIG. 11).

Next, in step S28, the satisfiability determination unit 24 determines whether or not C _selected = C _all . In this process, the determination in step S28 is made based on the concept that all conditional clauses of all test cases only need to appear in the output test case combination at least once. Here, since all the conditional clause sets C _all and the selected conditional clause set C _selected in FIG. 9 do not match, the determination is negative and the processing returns to step S12.

When returning to step S12, the above-described processing is repeated. That is, in step S12, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 selects the condition (B) described above (of the conditional clause included in the test case combination) from among the highest priority combinations “X_normal → Y_normal → Z_normal”. Among them, a combination of test cases is acquired based on the selection of combinations with many conditional clauses not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected . Here, the combination “X03Y04Z02” satisfying the condition (B) is acquired from among the most prioritized combinations of X_normal → Y_normal → Z_normal (refer to reference numeral (S12-2) in FIG. 11).

Next, in step S14, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 sets “A = 2 & B ≧ 200 & A! = 3 & C =“ s ”&B> 300 as the union C _comb of the conditional clauses of the combination“ X03Y04Z02 ”. & D = false ”(see reference numeral (S14-2) in FIG. 11). Thereafter, when the determination in step S16 is negative, the conditions are combined in step S18, and in step S20, the satisfiability determination unit 24 performs satisfiability determination of the combined conditions by the SAT solver. Here, it is assumed that the result of the SAT solver is SAT, as indicated by reference numeral (S20-2) in FIG. Accordingly, the determination in step S22 is affirmed, and in step S24, the satisfiability determination unit 24 adds the test case combination to the output test case combination (see reference numeral (S24-2) in FIG. 11). Next, in step S26, the satisfiability determination unit 24 underlines the conditional clauses that are not present in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected among the conditional clauses included in the combination of test cases (in the reference numeral (S14-2) in FIG. 11). All the conditional clauses added) are added to C _selected (see reference numeral (S26-2) in FIG. 11). Thereafter, in step S28, the satisfiability determining unit 24 determines whether or not C _selected = C _all . Here, since all the conditional clause sets C _all and the selected conditional clause set C _selected in FIG. 9 do not match, the determination in step S28 is denied and the process returns to step S12.

Returning to step S12, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 attempts to acquire the next combination from the most preferential combination of “X_normal → Y_normal → Z_normal”, as described above. However, there is no combination of test cases having conditional clauses not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected (S16: Yes). Therefore, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 selects the next combination from the “X_normal → Y_abnormal” combination (the combination (3) in FIG. 10 (a) and FIG. 10 (b)). get. In this case, as shown in FIG. 12, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires the test case combination “X01Y02” based on the condition (B) (see reference numeral (S12-3)).

Subsequently, in step S14, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires “A = 1 & B <100 & A! = 2 & C! =“ P ”” as the union C _comb of the conditional clauses of the combination “X01Y02”. (Refer to reference sign (S14-3) in FIG. 12). Thereafter, when the determination in step S16 is negative, the conditions are combined in step S18, and in step S20, the satisfiability determination unit 24 performs satisfiability determination of the combined conditions by the SAT solver. Here, it is assumed that the result of the SAT solver is SAT, as indicated by reference numeral (S20-3) in FIG. Therefore, the determination in step S22 is affirmed, and in step S24, the satisfiability determination unit 24 adds the test case combination to the output test case combination (see reference numeral (S24-3) in FIG. 12). Next, in step S26, the satisfiability determination unit 24 underlines the conditional clauses that are not present in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected among the conditional clauses included in the combination of test cases (reference numeral (S14-3) in FIG. 12). The conditional clause attached) is added to C _selected (see symbol (S26-3) in FIG. 12). Thereafter, in step S28, the satisfiability determining unit 24 determines whether or not C _selected = C _all . Here, since all the conditional clause sets C _all and the selected conditional clause set C _selected in FIG. 9 do not match, the determination in step S28 is denied and the process returns to step S12.

  Returning to step S12, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires the next combination from the combinations of “X_normal → Y_abnormal” as described above. In this case, as shown in FIG. 12, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires the test case combination “X03Y03” based on the condition (B) (see reference numeral (S12-4)).

Subsequently, in step S14, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 acquires “A = 2 & B ≧ 200 & A! = 3 & C =“ p ”as the union C _comb of the conditional clauses of the combination“ X03Y03 ”. (Refer to a sign (S14-4) in FIG. 12). Thereafter, when the determination in step S16 is negative, the conditions are combined in step S18, and in step S20, the satisfiability determination unit 24 performs satisfiability determination of the combined conditions by the SAT solver. Here, it is assumed that the result of the SAT solver is SAT, as indicated by reference numeral (S20-4) in FIG. Accordingly, the determination in step S22 is affirmed, and in step S24, the satisfiability determination unit 24 adds the test case combination to the output test case combination (see reference numeral (S24-4) in FIG. 12). Next, in step S26, the satisfiability determination unit 24 underlines the conditional clauses that do not already exist in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected among the conditional clauses included in the test case combination (in the code (S14-4) in FIG. 12). The conditional clause attached) is added to C _selected (see symbol (S26-4) in FIG. 12). Thereafter, in step S28, the satisfiability determining unit 24 determines whether or not C _selected = C _all . Here, since all condition clause sets C _all and selected conditional clause set C _selected in FIG. 9 match, the determination in step S28 is affirmed, and the process proceeds to step S30.

  In step S30, the satisfiability determining unit 24 adds the test specification combination as it is to the output test case combination if there is an abnormality in the first specification. In the present embodiment, “X02” and “X04”, which are “X_abnormal”, are added to the output test case combination (see symbols (S30-1) and (S30-2) in FIG. 12). After step S30, the process proceeds to step S32. The post-processing unit 26 converts the output test case combination into XML data and outputs the XML data to the IT specification conversion unit 18. Thereafter, the entire process of FIG. 6 ends.

  Here, in the present embodiment, the number of executions can be reduced by executing the processing of FIG. 6 as compared to the case of exhaustively executing the SAT solver. In this example, the SAT solver needs to be executed four times. In addition, all combinations of output test cases are valid.

(Comparative example)
Next, a comparative example will be described based on FIGS.

  FIG. 13 shows an outline of the procedure of the comparative example. As shown in FIG. 13, in the comparative example, (1) all combinations of test cases are comprehensively generated from the test case specifications, and (2) combinations that can be satisfied are extracted by the satisfiability determination by the SAT solver. (3) A process of narrowing down test case combinations through condition coverage is executed. Note that narrowing down by condition coverage is based on the concept that all conditional clauses of all test cases only need to appear in the output test case combination at least once, as in the above embodiment. In the following description, it is assumed that the subject of processing in the comparative example is the “test case specification combining unit 16 ′”.

  In order to realize the procedure of this comparative example, first, (1) the test case specification combining unit 16 ′ acquires all combinations of X, Y, and Z in an exhaustive order, as shown in FIGS. 4 × 4 × 3 = 48 test case combinations are generated. Since the error clause is not used in the comparative example, it is deleted in FIGS. In addition, one combination of conditional clauses is left, and the other is deleted. For example, in FIG. 13 and no. 15 is duplicated and no. 16 and no. 18 is duplicated, no. 13 and no. 16 and no. 15 and No. 18 is deleted.

  Next, (2) the test case specification combination unit 16 ′ executes satisfiability determination of each test case combination by the SAT solver, and extracts only SAT combinations. 14 and FIG. 15, the underlined conditional clause means a competing conditional clause that causes UNSAT. In this case, 26 combinations as shown in the upper part of FIG. 16 are extracted from the determination result of the satisfiability as shown in FIGS.

Next, (3-1) the test case specification combining unit 16 ′ obtains a union of the conditional clauses of all the test case combinations, and creates an all conditional clause set C _all (see the lower part of FIG. 16). Next, (3-2) the test case specification combining unit 16 ′ empties the _selected conditional clause set C _selected , (3-3) acquires one test case combination at a time, and performs a check.

In the check of (3-3), the test case specification combining unit 16 ′ checks whether all the conditional clauses of the acquired combination of test cases exist in the selected conditional clause set C _selected , If it exists, delete the test case combination. On the other hand, if at least one of the conditional clauses of the acquired test case combination does not exist in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected , the existing test clause combination is not deleted, and the existing conditional clause is not deleted. _Included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected . Then, when the selected conditional clause set C _selected matches all the conditional clause sets C _all , the check is finished.

Specifically, as shown in FIG. 1, no. The test case combinations are acquired in the order of 2. That is, no. When the combination of one test case is acquired, all of the conditional clauses are not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected. Therefore, the combination is not deleted and all of the conditional clauses are selected in the selected conditional clause set C _selected. (Solid arrow in FIG. 17). Then, No. When the combination of 2 is acquired, since all of the conditional clauses are included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected , the combination is deleted. In this case, nothing is included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected (broken arrow in FIG. 17). No. When the combination of 3 is acquired, since a part of the conditional clause is not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected , the combination is not deleted, and the conditional clause not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _{selected. Are} included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected . Then, No. When the combination of 4 is acquired, since all of the conditional clauses are included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected , the combination is deleted. Hereinafter, no. When the same processing is executed up to 17 combinations, the selected conditional clause set C _selected matches all the conditional clause sets C _all , so the check ends (Nos. 18 to 26 are not checked).

  With the above processing, in the comparative example, a combination of six test cases as shown in FIG. FIG. 18B shows a table comparing the number of executions of the SAT solver and the number of condition checks in narrowing down in the comparative example and the present embodiment. In the comparative example, the number of executions of the SAT solver was 48, and the number of condition checks in narrowing down (the number of checks in FIG. 17) was 17. On the other hand, in the present embodiment, as described above, the number of SAT solvers is four, and the number of condition checks in narrowing is four. From this result, it can be seen that in the present embodiment, the number of executions of the SAT solver and the number of condition checks in narrowing down can be reduced.

  Further, in the comparative example, there are four invalid combinations as shown in FIG. For example, the combination “X01Y02Z01” is a combination in which Y02 is an abnormal case, is useless even when combined with Z01, and is actually invalid. Further, the combination “X01Y03Z03” is also a combination that is useless even in combination with Z03 because Y03 is an abnormal case, and is actually invalid. Further, “X02Y01Z02” is a combination that is useless even in combination with Y01 and Z02 because X02 is an abnormal case, and is actually invalid. Further, “X03Y03Z02” is a combination that is useless even in combination with Z02 because Y03 is an abnormal case, and is actually invalid. On the other hand, the present embodiment has an advantage that an invalid combination is not output because the test case is divided into a normal case and an abnormal case in advance to combine the test cases.

As described above in detail, according to the present embodiment, the preprocessing unit 20 classifies test cases included in a plurality of test case specifications whose order is determined in advance into two types of normal cases and abnormal cases. . Then, a set of selected conditional clauses is selected from the combinations of test cases specified based on the order and the types of test cases classified (normal cases or abnormal cases) executed by the test case combination acquisition unit 22. The process (S14, S16) for acquiring the combination of test cases including the conditional clause not included in C _selected and having the largest number, and the acquired combination of test cases executed by the satisfiability determination unit 24 are satisfied. A process of determining whether the combination is possible by the SAT solver (S20), and a process of adding a conditional clause included in the acquired combination of test cases to the selected conditional clause set C _selected (S26). Repeat until the conditional clause included in _selected matches the conditional clause included in all conditional clause sets C _all (S28), and the post-processing unit 26 determines that it can be satisfied (SAT). The combination of the test cases that have been performed is output (S32). Thereby, the test case is divided into the normal case and the abnormal case, and the combination of the test cases is specified based on the divided result, so that it is possible to suppress the output of the invalid test case combination. In particular, in the present embodiment, the test case combination acquisition unit 22 prioritizes a normal case and does not combine another test case after an abnormal case when acquiring a test case combination. It is possible to prevent the combination of cases from being output. In addition, by classifying and processing the normal case and the abnormal case as described above, the possibility that the combination will explode becomes low even when there are many test case specifications, and the processing efficiency can be improved. Further, the SAT solver is executed from a combination of test cases including the largest number of conditional clauses not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected , and the conditional clauses included in the combination of the test cases are changed to the selected conditional clause set C _selected . As a result, the time until the conditional clauses included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected and the conditional clauses included in the entire conditional clause set C _all are compared with the case where the test cases are comprehensively specified. It can be shortened and the number of SAT solvers can be reduced. Furthermore, since only combinations of test cases including conditional clauses not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected are determined to be satisfactory combinations by the SAT solver (S20), determination by the SAT solver is performed as in the comparative example. The number of SAT solvers can be reduced compared to the case where it is determined whether or not a conditional clause that is not included in the _selected conditional clause set C _selected is included. As described above, according to the present embodiment, an effective combination of test cases can be determined efficiently.

  In the present embodiment, the post-processing unit 26 outputs an abnormal case included in the test case specification (X) in the first order to the IT specification conversion unit 18. This makes it possible to output test cases that can be satisfied independently without being combined with other test cases.

  In the above-described embodiment, the processing related to the test specification for the financial system has been described. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and the above-described embodiment is not limited to the processing for combining a plurality of test case specifications including other check-type specifications. It is also possible to apply.

  The above processing functions can be realized by a computer. In that case, a program describing the processing contents of the functions that the processing apparatus should have is provided. By executing the program on a computer, the above processing functions are realized on the computer. The program describing the processing contents can be recorded on a computer-readable recording medium (except for a carrier wave).

  When the program is distributed, for example, it is sold in the form of a portable recording medium such as a DVD (Digital Versatile Disc) or a CD-ROM (Compact Disc Read Only Memory) on which the program is recorded. It is also possible to store the program in a storage device of a server computer and transfer the program from the server computer to another computer via a network.

  The computer that executes the program stores, for example, the program recorded on the portable recording medium or the program transferred from the server computer in its own storage device. Then, the computer reads the program from its own storage device and executes processing according to the program. The computer can also read the program directly from the portable recording medium and execute processing according to the program. Further, each time the program is transferred from the server computer, the computer can sequentially execute processing according to the received program.

  The above-described embodiment is an example of a preferred embodiment of the present invention. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and various modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the present invention.

In addition, the following additional remarks are disclosed regarding description of the above embodiment.
(Supplementary note 1) A test case specification combining program for combining a plurality of test case specifications having a predetermined order,
The test cases included in the plurality of test case specifications are classified into two types, normal and abnormal,
A combination of test cases identified based on the order and the type of the classified test case, including a conditional clause that is not stored in a storage unit that stores the acquired conditional clause; A process for acquiring a combination of test cases having the largest number of conditional clauses not stored in a section, a process for determining whether the acquired combination of test cases is a satisfactory combination, and a combination of the acquired test cases The process of storing the conditional clause included in the storage unit is repeated until a predetermined timing,
Outputting a combination of the test cases determined to be a satisfactory combination, causing the computer to execute a process;
The test case specification combination program, wherein the predetermined timing is a timing at which a conditional clause stored in the storage unit matches all conditional clauses included in the plurality of test case specifications.
(Supplementary Note 2) The test case specification combination according to Supplementary Note 1, wherein the output process further outputs test cases classified as abnormal in the order included in the first test case specification. program.
(Additional remark 3) In the said repeating process, when specifying the combination of the said test case, the test case classified normally is given priority, and the test case classified as abnormal and the test case classified as the abnormal The test case specification combination program according to appendix 1 or 2, characterized by not being combined with a test case behind
(Supplementary Note 4) A test case specification combining method for combining a plurality of test case specifications having a predetermined order,
The test cases included in the plurality of test case specifications are classified into two types, normal and abnormal,
A combination of test cases identified based on the order and the type of the classified test case, including a conditional clause that is not stored in a storage unit that stores the acquired conditional clause; A process for acquiring a combination of test cases having the largest number of conditional clauses not stored in a section, a process for determining whether the acquired combination of test cases is a satisfactory combination, and a combination of the acquired test cases The process of storing the conditional clause included in the storage unit is repeated until a predetermined timing,
A computer executes a process of outputting a combination of the test cases determined to be a satisfactory combination,
The test case specification combining method, wherein the predetermined timing is a timing at which a conditional clause stored in the storage unit coincides with all conditional clauses included in the plurality of test case specifications.
(Additional remark 5) In the said output process, the test case specification combined | bonding of Additional remark 4 characterized by further outputting the test case classified into the abnormality in which the said order is contained in the first test case specification Method.
(Additional remark 6) In the said repeating process, when specifying the combination of the said test cases, the test case classified normally is given priority, and the test case classified as abnormal and the test case classified as the abnormal The test case specification combining method according to appendix 4 or 5, wherein the test case specification combination method is not combined with a test case behind the test case.
(Appendix 7) A test case specification combining device for combining a plurality of test case specifications having a predetermined order,
A classification unit for classifying the test cases included in the plurality of test case specifications into two types of normal and abnormal,
A combination of test cases identified based on the order and the type of the classified test case, including a conditional clause that is not stored in a storage unit that stores the acquired conditional clause; A process for acquiring a combination of test cases having the largest number of conditional clauses not stored in a section, a process for determining whether the acquired combination of test cases is a satisfactory combination, and a combination of the acquired test cases A processing unit that repeats the process of storing the included conditional clause in the storage unit until a predetermined timing;
An output unit that outputs the combination of the test cases determined to be a satisfactory combination, and
The test case specification combining apparatus, wherein the predetermined timing is a timing at which a conditional clause stored in the storage unit coincides with all conditional clauses included in the plurality of test case specifications.
(Supplementary note 8) The test case specification combining device according to supplementary note 7, wherein the output unit further outputs a test case classified as abnormal in which the order is included in the first test case specification.
(Additional remark 9) When the said process part specifies the combination of the said test case, it gives priority to the test case classified normally, the test case classified abnormally, and the test case in which the said order was classified into this abnormality 9. The test case specification combining device according to appendix 7 or 8, characterized in that the test case specification combining device is not combined with a test case behind.

10 Integrated test device (Test case specification combining device)
20 Pre-processing part (classification part)
22 Test case combination acquisition unit (part of processing unit)
24 Satisfiability determination unit (part of processing unit)
26 Post-processing section (output section)

Claims (5)

A test case specification combining program for combining a plurality of test case specifications having a predetermined order,
The test cases included in the plurality of test case specifications are classified into two types, normal and abnormal,
A combination of test cases identified based on the order and the type of the classified test case, including a conditional clause that is not stored in a storage unit that stores the acquired conditional clause; A process for acquiring a combination of test cases having the largest number of conditional clauses not stored in a section, a process for determining whether the acquired combination of test cases is a satisfactory combination, and a combination of the acquired test cases The process of storing the conditional clause included in the storage unit is repeated until a predetermined timing,
Outputting a combination of the test cases determined to be a satisfactory combination, causing the computer to execute a process;
The test case specification combination program, wherein the predetermined timing is a timing at which a conditional clause stored in the storage unit matches all conditional clauses included in the plurality of test case specifications.   2. The test case specification combination program according to claim 1, wherein in the output process, a test case classified as abnormal is included in the first test case specification in the order.   In the iterative process, when specifying a combination of the test cases, the test cases classified normally are given priority, the test cases classified abnormally, and the tests behind the test cases classified as abnormal 3. The test case specification combination program according to claim 1, wherein the test case specification combination program is not combined with a case. A test case specification combining method for combining a plurality of test case specifications having a predetermined order,
The test cases included in the plurality of test case specifications are classified into two types, normal and abnormal,
A combination of test cases identified based on the order and the type of the classified test case, including a conditional clause that is not stored in a storage unit that stores the acquired conditional clause; A process for acquiring a combination of test cases having the largest number of conditional clauses not stored in a section, a process for determining whether the acquired combination of test cases is a satisfactory combination, and a combination of the acquired test cases The process of storing the conditional clause included in the storage unit is repeated until a predetermined timing,
A computer executes a process of outputting a combination of the test cases determined to be a satisfactory combination,
The test case specification combining method, wherein the predetermined timing is a timing at which a conditional clause stored in the storage unit coincides with all conditional clauses included in the plurality of test case specifications. A test case specification combining device for combining a plurality of test case specifications having a predetermined order,
A classification unit for classifying the test cases included in the plurality of test case specifications into two types of normal and abnormal,
A combination of test cases identified based on the order and the type of the classified test case, including a conditional clause that is not stored in a storage unit that stores the acquired conditional clause; A process for acquiring a combination of test cases having the largest number of conditional clauses not stored in a section, a process for determining whether the acquired combination of test cases is a satisfactory combination, and a combination of the acquired test cases A processing unit that repeats the process of storing the included conditional clause in the storage unit until a predetermined timing;
An output unit that outputs the combination of the test cases determined to be a satisfactory combination, and
The test case specification combining apparatus, wherein the predetermined timing is a timing at which a conditional clause stored in the storage unit coincides with all conditional clauses included in the plurality of test case specifications.

Images