在bb0的突变测试状态

Goran Petrović, M. Ivankovic
{"title":"在bb0的突变测试状态","authors":"Goran Petrović, M. Ivankovic","doi":"10.1145/3183519.3183521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mutation testing assesses test suite efficacy by inserting small faults into programs and measuring the ability of the test suite to detect them. It is widely considered the strongest test criterion in terms of finding the most faults and it subsumes a number of other coverage criteria. Traditional mutation analysis is computationally prohibitive which hinders its adoption as an industry standard. In order to alleviate the computational issues, we present a diff-based probabilistic approach to mutation analysis that drastically reduces the number of mutants by omitting lines of code without statement coverage and lines that are determined to be uninteresting - we dub these arid lines. Furthermore, by reducing the number of mutants and carefully selecting only the most interesting ones we make it easier for humans to understand and evaluate the result of mutation analysis. We propose a heuristic for judging whether a node is arid or not, conditioned on the programming language. We focus on a code-review based approach and consider the effects of surfacing mutation results on developer attention. The described system is used by 6,000 engineers in Google on all code changes they author or review, affecting in total more than 13,000 code authors as part of the mandatory code review process. The system processes about 30% of all diffs across Google that have statement coverage calculated. About 15% of coverage statement calculations fail across Google.","PeriodicalId":445513,"journal":{"name":"2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice Track (ICSE-SEIP)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"92","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State of Mutation Testing at Google\",\"authors\":\"Goran Petrović, M. Ivankovic\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3183519.3183521\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Mutation testing assesses test suite efficacy by inserting small faults into programs and measuring the ability of the test suite to detect them. It is widely considered the strongest test criterion in terms of finding the most faults and it subsumes a number of other coverage criteria. Traditional mutation analysis is computationally prohibitive which hinders its adoption as an industry standard. In order to alleviate the computational issues, we present a diff-based probabilistic approach to mutation analysis that drastically reduces the number of mutants by omitting lines of code without statement coverage and lines that are determined to be uninteresting - we dub these arid lines. Furthermore, by reducing the number of mutants and carefully selecting only the most interesting ones we make it easier for humans to understand and evaluate the result of mutation analysis. We propose a heuristic for judging whether a node is arid or not, conditioned on the programming language. We focus on a code-review based approach and consider the effects of surfacing mutation results on developer attention. The described system is used by 6,000 engineers in Google on all code changes they author or review, affecting in total more than 13,000 code authors as part of the mandatory code review process. The system processes about 30% of all diffs across Google that have statement coverage calculated. About 15% of coverage statement calculations fail across Google.\",\"PeriodicalId\":445513,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice Track (ICSE-SEIP)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"92\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice Track (ICSE-SEIP)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3183519.3183521\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice Track (ICSE-SEIP)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3183519.3183521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 92

摘要

突变测试通过在程序中插入小错误并测量测试套件检测它们的能力来评估测试套件的有效性。它被广泛认为是发现最多错误的最强测试标准,它包含了许多其他覆盖标准。传统的突变分析在计算上是令人望而却步的,这阻碍了它作为行业标准的采用。为了减轻计算问题,我们提出了一种基于差异的概率方法来进行突变分析,该方法通过省略没有语句覆盖的代码行和确定为无趣的代码行(我们将这些行称为干旱行)来大幅减少突变的数量。此外,通过减少突变体的数量并仔细选择最有趣的突变体,我们使人类更容易理解和评估突变分析的结果。我们提出了一种基于编程语言的启发式判断节点是否干旱的方法。我们专注于基于代码审查的方法,并考虑表面突变结果对开发人员注意力的影响。所描述的系统被谷歌的6000名工程师用于他们编写或审查的所有代码更改,作为强制性代码审查过程的一部分,总共影响了超过13000名代码作者。该系统处理了Google中计算了报表覆盖率的所有差异的30%左右。大约15%的覆盖率声明计算在Google上失败。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
State of Mutation Testing at Google
Mutation testing assesses test suite efficacy by inserting small faults into programs and measuring the ability of the test suite to detect them. It is widely considered the strongest test criterion in terms of finding the most faults and it subsumes a number of other coverage criteria. Traditional mutation analysis is computationally prohibitive which hinders its adoption as an industry standard. In order to alleviate the computational issues, we present a diff-based probabilistic approach to mutation analysis that drastically reduces the number of mutants by omitting lines of code without statement coverage and lines that are determined to be uninteresting - we dub these arid lines. Furthermore, by reducing the number of mutants and carefully selecting only the most interesting ones we make it easier for humans to understand and evaluate the result of mutation analysis. We propose a heuristic for judging whether a node is arid or not, conditioned on the programming language. We focus on a code-review based approach and consider the effects of surfacing mutation results on developer attention. The described system is used by 6,000 engineers in Google on all code changes they author or review, affecting in total more than 13,000 code authors as part of the mandatory code review process. The system processes about 30% of all diffs across Google that have statement coverage calculated. About 15% of coverage statement calculations fail across Google.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信