240 likes | 360 Views
UDME Unit Development , Measurement and Efforts. A programmer‘s experience What is possible?. U nit D evelopment, M easurement and E fforts Agenda. Problem Process Steps and Tests System Efforts Errors Measures Conclusion. U nit D evelopment, M easurement and E fforts The Problem.
E N D
UDMEUnit Development , Measurement and Efforts A programmer‘s experience What is possible?
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsAgenda • Problem • Process • Steps and Tests • System • Efforts • Errors • Measures • Conclusion
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsThe Problem Costs Too expensive ... Too difficult ... Too long ... Too ... Too ...
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsBasics for Start: Details
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsStandard Test: Details
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsMeasured Quality: Details
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsAsserts assert ( tabel space ) assert ( overflow ) assert ( underflow ) assert ( declaration of table limits ) assert ( compiler restriction )
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsStandard Test Case Tree (in Parts) low = high - + no xi a - + more than one xi a - + ! i = low - + xi >a - + Asserts are tested separately. xi =a - +
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsPlanning the System Per Level Order of importance Conditions sine qua non
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsImplementing the System Independent first Condition first Sub tree first Hardest first Bottom up Complete sub tree
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsSelected Location Parameter # of modules: 168 Data collected: 7.2002 - 7.2003 Maintenance index no dimension Effort in minutes Size in editor lines
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsErrors Benefit dynamic measurement 5:1
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsMaintenance Measuring Measure Tool Formula
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsRegions of Maintenance More than 95 % of the modules have at least a fair maintainability index. Benefit of static measurement
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsEffort and Poor Maintenance Within poor region HP (n=5 %=2.98) Effort Type- --Group--- Percent mean part mean all- Basic------ 1645 7.48 329.00 130.96 Std. Test-- 759 7.33 151.80 61.61 Measurement 98 5.82 19.60 10.03 Sum Effort- 2502 7.35 500.40 202.60
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsEffort and Fair Maintenance Within fair region HP (n=28 %=16.67) Effort Type- --Group--- Percent mean part mean all- Basic------ 8340 37.91 297.86 130.96 Std. Test-- 3125 30.19 111.61 61.61 Measurement 480 28.49 17.14 10.03 Sum Effort- 11945 35.09 426.61 202.60
Unit Development, Measurement and EffortsEffort and Excellent Maintenance Within excellent region HP (n=135 %=80.36) Effort Type- --Group--- Percent mean part mean all- Basic------ 12016 54.62 89.01 130.96 Std. Test-- 6467 62.48 47.90 61.61 Measurement 1107 65.70 8.20 10.03 Sum Effort- 19590 57.56 145.11 202.60 Honi soit qui mal y pense!
Unit Development, Measurement and Efforts It is possible ... To develop programs so that Measuring requires less than 5 % of the effort, Test reach a code coverage of 100% LCSAJs within less than 2 % of the effort, Source codes fulfils the high level quality requirements without any additional effort for 98 %of the modules, An excellent maintainability is achieved with less effort per module than the mean value for more than 80 % of the modules, A poor maintainability appears for less than 3 % of the modules and Quality benefits are earned during the development process. Is quality free?