JPH07225680A - Method and device for confirming software review check item comprehensibility - Google Patents

Abstract

PURPOSE:To provide confirmation method and device for evaluating the comprehensibility of review check items used for the review of a software and supplementing lacking items. CONSTITUTION:An internal characteristic/quality sub-characteristic relation list for stipulating the correspondence of the quality sub characteristics and internal characteristics of the software is stored in a storage device 10, the review check items of the software are inputted from an input part 11 and a problem to be possibly generated when the items are not checked is assumed in a check item formulation part 13. The quality sub-characteristics to be damaged by the generation of the problem are specified and the internal characteristics influencing the quality sub characteristics are specified. It is judged that the review check items are lacking in a check item comprehensibility judgement part 15 when the correspondence of the internal characteristics and the quality sub-characteristics present in the list is not present in the set of the correspondence of the specified internal characteristics and quality sub-characteristics and the correspondence of the specified internal characteristics and quality sub-characteristics is added in the list and stored when the correspondence of the specified internal characteristics and quality sub-characteristics is not present in the list.

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention is used to improve the quality of software, and a software review check item completeness confirmation method and a software review check item completeness confirmation method for confirming whether or not a software review check item covers all necessary items. Regarding the device, in more detail, in order to confirm the completeness of the review check items (hereinafter also simply referred to as check items or items) used in software development, it is used as a means of review work and The present invention relates to a software review check item completeness confirmation method and device that evaluates and clarify the attributes of missing check items.

[0002]

Review is an important task in developing high quality software. However, no method has been established to confirm whether the review work is being carried out appropriately. At present, a general technique is to accumulate and classify data on the places that are likely to occur and the types of errors based on experience and sort them out as review check items.

[0003]

However, in the actual review work, the quality of the review performed varies greatly depending on the knowledge and experience of the reviewer. Therefore, the review check items are set, the review work is performed based on the review check items, and the items that must be reviewed at least are checked to minimize the variation in the work performed by the reviewers.

However, this review item is also set by experience, etc., and it is unclear whether or not there are omissions in the check items. Furthermore, it is possible that the check items are biased toward a certain type of error.

The present invention has been made in view of the above,
It is an object of the present invention to provide a software review check item completeness confirmation method and device that evaluates completeness of review check items used for software reviews and complements missing items.

[0006]

In order to achieve the above object, the software review check item comprehensiveness confirmation method of the present invention realizes quality subcharacteristics and software in which a plurality of quality characteristics for defining software quality are further divided. The internal characteristics / quality subcharacteristics related table that stipulates a standard correspondence with the internal characteristics of the software, including the structure, size, and consistency of the description expression of the program to be stored, is stored. Used for software review, enter review check items for inspecting the quality of each software, and assume a problem that would occur if the review check items were not checked,
A quality sub-characteristic in the quality characteristic that is damaged by the occurrence of the problem is specified, the internal characteristic that affects the specified quality sub-characteristic is specified, and the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list is specified. Is read, and the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic existing in the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic related list does not exist in the set of the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic specified from the review check item. In the case, it is determined that the review check items are insufficient, and if the correspondence between the internal characteristics and the quality sub characteristics identified from the review check items does not exist in the internal characteristics / quality sub characteristics related list, It is a gist to additionally store the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub characteristic specified from the review check item in the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list.

Further, the software review check item coverage checking device of the present invention covers software review check items for checking whether or not the software review check items cover all the necessary items in order to improve the quality of the software. An internal property and structure of the software including a quality sub-characteristic, which is a quality verification device, which is obtained by further dividing a plurality of quality characteristics that define the quality of the software, and the structure, size, and consistency of the description expression of the program that realizes the software The storage means that stores the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristics related list that defines the standard correspondence with the internal characteristics that indicate the above, and the review check items used to inspect the quality of each software used for software review are input. Input means to perform, and the review check input from the input means Assuming a problem that would occur if the eyes were not checked, identifying a quality sub-characteristic in the quality characteristic that is damaged by the occurrence of the problem, and affecting the specified quality sub-characteristic. Specifying means for specifying the internal characteristic and the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list stored in the storage means, and the internal characteristic and quality present in the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list When the correspondence with the sub characteristic does not exist in the set of the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub characteristic specified by the specifying means, it is determined that the review check items are insufficient, and the specifying means specifies the check item. When the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic that has been specified does not exist in the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list, the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic specified by the specifying means is described above. Internal characteristics And summarized in that and a judging means for storing in said memory means so as to add in quality secondary characteristics related table.

[0008]

In the software review check item comprehensiveness confirmation method and apparatus of the present invention, the internal characteristic / quality subcharacteristic relation list that defines the correspondence between the software quality subcharacteristics and the internal characteristics is stored, and the software review is performed. By entering a check item and assuming a problem that would occur if the review check item is not checked, the quality sub-characteristics that are damaged by the occurrence of the problem are specified, and the specified quality sub-characteristics are specified. The internal characteristics that affect the internal characteristics and the quality subcharacteristics are identified in the set of correspondences between the internal characteristics and the quality subcharacteristics specified in the internal characteristics / quality subcharacteristics related list. If it doesn't exist,
It is judged that the review check items are insufficient, and the correspondence between the specified internal characteristic and the quality sub characteristic is the internal characteristic
If it does not exist in the quality sub characteristic related list, the correspondence between the specified internal characteristic and the quality sub characteristic
It is additionally stored in the quality subcharacteristic relation list.

[0009]

Embodiments of the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of a software review check item coverage confirmation apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention. The software review check item comprehensiveness confirmation device shown in FIG. 1 has a storage device 10 that stores an internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list that defines correspondences between quality sub characteristics of software quality characteristics and internal characteristics. The internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list stored in the storage device 10 is, more specifically, a quality sub-characteristic obtained by further dividing a plurality of quality characteristics that define the quality of software and a structure of a program for realizing software, It defines a standard correspondence with the internal characteristics of software, including size and consistency of descriptive expressions, and internal characteristics that indicate the structure.

The quality characteristics are defined, for example, in the international standard ISO / IEC 9126, and the quality subcharacteristics of the subordinate concept of the quality characteristics are shown as a reference in the international standard. However, these are described below.

[0012] In addition, the internal characteristics listed in the internal characteristics / quality subcharacteristics related list are internal characteristics of the software such as the program structure, the size of the program, and the consistency of the descriptive expression for actually evaluating the software. Although it shows the structure and the structure, it has been clarified as a result of software engineering so far that various properties of software classified into the internal characteristics have a strong influence on the quality of software. Therefore, in order to evaluate the quality of software under development, it is sufficient to evaluate this internal characteristic. Therefore, the internal characteristics and the above-mentioned quality subcharacteristics are associated with each other as the internal characteristic / quality subcharacteristic relation list, and the quality characteristics and the quality subcharacteristics are shown in the correspondence relation in the internal characteristic / quality subcharacteristic relation list. Quality can be covered by checking all internal characteristics.

[0013] As internal characteristics, those shown in the 1991 Software Development / System Documented Standardization Survey Research Report, March 1992, Japan Standards Association are used as an example. The internal characteristics and their definitions are shown below.

(1) Completeness: A property in which planned or requested functions are sufficiently realized. (2) Traceability: The property of being able to follow the relationship from a request to an realized one along the development process. (3) Consistency: A property in which design and manufacturing techniques, marking methods, terms, and symbols are unified. (4) Self-describability: The nature of explaining functions and the relationship between functions. (5) Consistency: There is no contradiction in the same function of the system or program, and there is no contradiction between the program and the document. (6) Computational accuracy: The property that the computational results and outputs achieve the required accuracy. (7) Data commonality: The nature of how much data is prepared for standardization of data. (8) Commonality of communication procedures: The nature of common communication procedures and interfaces. (9) Accessibility: The property that a program function or related device can be selected and used freely. (10) Access controllability: The property of controlling access to software and data. (11) Access auditability: The property that records of access to software and data can be recorded. (12) Robustness: The property that data and programs are not destroyed even if an incorrect operation is performed. (13) Consistency: The property that data and programs are not destroyed even if an abnormality occurs inside the software. (14) Modularity: The property that software is appropriately structured so that changes and modifications can be localized. (15) Simplicity: The property that the method of realizing the specifications is simple. (16) Measureability: The property of observing the operating status of programs. (17) Self-inclusion: The property of being able to perform its own functions without depending on other programs. (18) Unity: A property in which meaning, expressions, and procedures are unique and identical. (19) Expressiveness: The property of well-modeled input / output and processing logic and results. (20) Hierarchy: A property in which logic is structured step by step from outline to detail. (21) Explainability: The nature of providing the latest information or the state of the user or software. (22) Metaphoricity: A property that allows the function and characteristics of software to be compared to another thing. (23) Completeness: A property that has all the functions and things to help use the software. (24) Attention: Pay attention to the user's sensitivity,
A property that helps people to recognize information and is entertaining. (25) Timeliness: A property that improves the time relationship with the user. (26) Appropriateness (memory): The property of providing information that matches the user's memory capacity and acceptance capacity. (27) Conciseness: A short and expressive property. (28) Selectivity: A property that is tailored to the ability and taste of the user. (29) Inducibility: A property that guides the user to the theory of software. (30) Safety: A property that covers the behavioral characteristics of the user and keeps it in a safe state. (31) Labor saving: A property that maximizes the effect on the input labor of the user. (32) Environmental compatibility: A property that makes it easy for the user to adapt the software to the operating environment. (33) Execution efficiency: A property that improves the ratio of response time, processing time, and throughput when executing software functions. (34) Resource efficiency: A property that saves the amount of resources used and the time used when executing software functions. (35) Extensibility: A property that is prepared so that it can easily respond to additions and changes in specifications. (36) Product manageability: A property that makes it easy to manage the product such as the configuration, version, and their consistency and history for each software component or document. (37) Software system independence: The property that software can operate independently of the environment of a specific software environment (OS, compiler, language, utility, other AP, etc.). (38) Machine independence: The property that software can operate independently of a specific hardware environment (system configuration, model, device, terminal, etc.). (39) Data independence: The property that software can operate without depending on a specific data environment (data, DB, DBMS, etc.). (40) Transmissibility: The nature of how easy and unified the input and output formats and contents of a program are.

FIG. 3 shows a standard internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list in which the quality sub characteristic and the internal characteristic of the quality characteristic described above are associated with each other.

In the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list shown in FIG. 3, the horizontal column shows the quality characteristic and the quality sub characteristic which is a subordinate concept of the quality characteristic, and the vertical column shows the internal characteristic, which correspond to each other. In the intersection column, "○" indicates the corresponding relationship between the two. For example, the "completeness" of the internal characteristic is the "purposefulness" and "accuracy" of the quality subcharacteristic among the functionality of the quality characteristic and the "maturity" of the quality subcharacteristic of the reliability of the quality characteristic.
It indicates that there is a correspondence relationship with “failure tolerance” and “recoverability”.

Further, the software review check item comprehensiveness confirmation device shown in FIG. 1 is used for a review work performed at the time of software development while referring to the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list stored in the storage device 10. First, the review check items for inspecting the quality of software are analyzed, and the formulation for associating the quality subcharacteristics with the related internal characteristics is performed first.
For this purpose, input section 1 for inputting review check items
Has 1. Then, the review check item input from the input unit 11 is supplied to the check item formulation unit 13, and a problem that may occur when the review check item is not checked in the check item formulation unit 13 is assumed. Then, the quality sub-characteristics in the quality characteristics that are impaired by the occurrence of the problem are specified, and the internal characteristics affecting the specified quality sub-characteristics are specified.

The quality subcharacteristics and internal characteristics specified by the check item formulation unit 13 from the review check items input from the input unit 11 as described above are supplied to the check item comprehensiveness determination unit 15. Then, the check item comprehensiveness determination unit 15 further reads the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list from the storage device 10, and thereby the internal characteristic and quality existing in the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list are read. It is determined whether or not the correspondence with the sub-characteristic exists in the set of the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic specified by the check item formulation unit 13, and if there is not, the review check item is insufficient. If the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic specified by the check item formulation unit 13 does not exist in the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list, the check item is checked. The correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub characteristic specified by the formulation unit 13 is stored in the storage device 10 so as to be added to the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list.

Then, the result of the coverage determination by the check item coverage determination unit 15 is output from the output unit 17.

Next, the operation will be described with reference to the flow chart shown in FIG.

First, when an existing review check item is input from the input unit 11 (step 110), this review check item is input to the check item formulation unit 13, and the review check item is not checked here. The problem that might occur is envisioned (step 120). For example, assuming that the review check item is “description of business processing is ambiguous”, the problem that arises is that the realized function is incorrect.

Next, the quality subcharacteristic of which quality characteristic is deteriorated by the occurrence of this problem is specified (step 130). In the above example, from the definition of quality characteristics and quality sub characteristics,
The quality characteristic can be associated with “functionality”, and the quality sub characteristic can be associated with “purposefulness”.

Further, the quality subcharacteristics specified as described above are impaired, and the internal characteristics are specified by associating which internal characteristics are affected (step 14).
0). In the above-mentioned example, it can be associated that the purposefulness is impaired because the "completeness" of the internal characteristic is not satisfied. As a result, in the above-described review check item, the "purposefulness" of the quality subcharacteristics and the "completeness" of the internal characteristics are associated with each other at the intersection on the internal characteristic / quality subcharacteristic relation list.

Next, the result of the formulation as described above, that is, the correspondence between the internal characteristics and the quality subcharacteristics specified in steps 130 and 140, is determined from the internal characteristics and the quality subcharacteristics in the internal characteristic / quality subcharacteristic relation list. Apply to the correspondence with the characteristics,
As a result, it is determined whether the specified correspondence relationship between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic is the correspondence relationship in the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list (step 150).

If there is a correspondence as a result of this judgment, it is judged whether or not there is a next review check item,
If there is, the process returns to step 110 and the same process is repeated for all the review check items (step 190). However, if the result of determination in step 150 is that there is no correspondence, it is checked whether the internal characteristics and quality subcharacteristics identified as described above are items in the internal characteristics / quality subcharacteristics related list. (Step 160). If no relation is found even though it is in the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list, it is determined that the review check items are insufficient (step 17).
0).

Then, the review check items are reset for the quality subcharacteristics and the internal characteristics which are judged to be insufficient. As with the generation, the definition of quality subcharacteristics and internal characteristics can be used as means. That is, it is possible to specifically derive the check items by considering to check a certain quality sub characteristic or internal characteristic in the software according to the definition.

If the specified internal characteristics and quality subcharacteristics are not listed in the items in the internal characteristics / quality subcharacteristics related list in the check in step 160, the internal characteristics / quality subcharacteristics related list is displayed. It is determined that there is a shortage, and the correspondence between the specified quality subcharacteristics and the internal characteristics is stored in the storage device 10 so as to be added to the internal characteristic / quality subcharacteristic relation list (step 180). In this way, by constantly reviewing the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list, the reliability of the standard internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list can be improved.

In step 190, as described above, it is determined whether or not there is a next review check item, and if there is, the process returns to step 110 and the same processing is repeated for all review check items ( Step 190).

FIG. 4 shows a result of a specific analysis of the review check items used for general business processing by the procedure of the present invention on the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list. In the figure, it can be confirmed that the response indicated by ○ is insufficient for the review check items to be analyzed. That is, the circles in FIG. 4 indicate correspondences in the list, but no relations are recognized from the review check items.

Further, the mark ● in FIG. 4 indicates that the relation is described in the corresponding intersection column of the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list in FIG. That is, the ● mark indicates the correspondence in which the relationship is shown in the list and the relationship is also recognized from the review check items.

The ⊚ mark in FIG. 4 has nothing to do with the corresponding intersection column in the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list in FIG. That is, the ⊚ mark indicates a correspondence in which the relationship is not recognized from the review check items, although the relationship is not shown in the list. For these, it is necessary to set new review check items and add them to the review checklist in light of the definition of quality subcharacteristics and internal characteristics.

Further, the mark Δ in FIG. 4 indicates the correspondence in which the review check items cannot be associated with the quality sub-characteristics and internal characteristics of the list. That is, when it is not possible to arrange in the list of FIG. 3, new quality sub-characteristics and internal characteristics related to both the quality sub-characteristics and the internal characteristics are newly provided, and a Δ mark is entered in the corresponding intersection column to make a standard list. This is reflected in the table. In this example, hardware-related, software-related, and management-related are newly provided.

By analyzing the completeness of the software review check items as described above, the review check items related to the quality subcharacteristics and the internal characteristics are complemented, and the completeness of the review check items can be confirmed.

When the number of review check items checked in comparison with the other columns is extremely large, it can be determined that the review check items classified therein have a high degree of redundancy. By reviewing the duplication of review check items classified into, it is possible to select more efficient review check items.

[0035]

As described above, according to the present invention,
Occurs when the internal characteristic / quality subcharacteristics related table that defines the correspondence between software quality subcharacteristics and internal characteristics is stored, software review check items are input, and the review check items are not checked. Assuming a problem that may occur, the quality sub-characteristics that are impaired by the occurrence of the problem are specified, the internal characteristics affecting the specified quality sub-characteristics are specified, and the internal characteristics / quality sub-characteristics are specified. When the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic existing in the related list does not exist in the set of the correspondence between the specified internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic, it is determined that the review check items are insufficient, and the identification is performed. When the correspondence between the specified internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic does not exist in the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list, the correspondence between the specified internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic Since it is additionally stored in the property / quality subcharacteristics related list, the completeness of the review check items can be accurately evaluated, and the missing review check items can be clarified. It is possible to add accurate review check items. As a result, the comprehensiveness of the review check items is enhanced, the quality of reviews is improved, and high quality software can be produced.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a software review check item comprehensiveness confirmation device according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing the operation of the software review check item coverage confirmation device shown in FIG.

FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list stored in a storage device used in the software review check item coverage confirmation device of FIG. 1;

FIG. 4 is a diagram showing a result of actual analysis performed on the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list shown in FIG.

[Explanation of symbols]

 10 storage device 11 input unit 13 check item formulation unit 15 check item comprehensiveness determination unit 17 output unit

Claims (2)

[Claims] 1. An internal property and structure of software including quality subcharacteristics obtained by further dividing a plurality of quality characteristics that define software quality and the structure, size, and consistency of description expression of a program that realizes software. The internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristics related table that defines the standard correspondence with the internal characteristics is stored, and the review check items used for software review and for inspecting the quality of each software are input. Assuming a problem that will occur if the review check items are not checked, identify the quality sub-characteristics in the quality characteristics that are damaged by the occurrence of the problem, and influence the specified quality sub-characteristics. The internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list is read out, and the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list is read out. If the correspondence between the internal characteristics and the quality sub-characteristics existing in the above does not exist in the set of the correspondence between the internal characteristics and the quality sub-characteristics identified from the review check items, it is determined that the review check items are insufficient, When the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub characteristic identified from the review check item does not exist in the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list, the internal characteristic and the quality sub characteristic identified from the review check item A method of confirming the completeness of software review check items, characterized in that the correspondence with the above is additionally stored in the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list. 2. A software review check item completeness confirmation device, which is used to improve the quality of software and confirms whether or not the software review check items cover all the necessary items. Standard correspondence between quality subcharacteristics obtained by further dividing a plurality of quality characteristics that define the above and internal characteristics of software including the structure, size, and consistency of description expression of a program that realizes software Storing means for storing the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristics related list that defines the above, input means for inputting review check items used for software review and for inspecting the quality of each software, and input from the input means The problems that may occur if the above-mentioned review check items are not checked Assuming that the quality subcharacteristics in the quality characteristics that are impaired by the occurrence of the problem are specified, and the specifying unit that specifies the internal characteristic that affects the specified quality subcharacteristics; The stored internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list is read, and the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic existing in the internal characteristic / quality sub-characteristic relation list is identified by the identifying means. If it does not exist in the set of correspondence between the characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic, it is determined that the review check items are insufficient, and the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub-characteristic specified by the specifying means is the internal. Characteristic·
If it does not exist in the quality sub characteristic relation list, the storage means should add the correspondence between the internal characteristic and the quality sub characteristic specified by the specifying means to the internal characteristic / quality sub characteristic relation list. A software review check item comprehensiveness confirmation device, characterized in that it has a determination means for storing it in the.