Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Generating Test Suites to Validate Legacy Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
System Analysis and Modeling. Languages, Methods, and Tools for Industry 4.0 (SAM 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11753))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Testing of modernized legacy systems is difficult due to that typically requirements specifications do not exist and that detailed knowledge of the architecture and design of the system may have been lost. In this paper we present an approach which derives test suites for a modernized legacy systems from the legacy code. We extend our earlier presented approach deriving test suites from use case map (UCM) specifications of a system by transforming the legacy code into a UCM model. We further discuss enhancements to the test generation process required to operate on the large models obtained from realistic legacy systems and to assure that the generated tests are meaningful to the tester. This approach has been used to validate the modernization of large (in excess of 20 million lines of code) mainframe applications implemented in COBOL.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. European Telecommunications Standards Institute. TTCN-3: Core Language. ES 201 873–1 4.11.1 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  2. International Telecommunications Union. Message Sequence Charts Z.120 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Letichevsky, A.A., Kapitonova, J.V., Kotlyarov, V.P., Volkov, V.A., Letichevsky, A.A., Weigert, T.: Semantics of message sequence charts. In: Prinz, A., Reed, R., Reed, J. (eds.) SDL 2005. LNCS, vol. 3530, pp. 117–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11506843_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Chelinsky, D.: The RSpec Book. The Pragmatic Bookshelf (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wynne, M., Hellesoy, A.: The Cucumber Book. The Pragmatic Bookshelf (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Baranov, S., Kotlyarov, V., Letichevsky, A.: An industrial technology of test automation based on verified behavioral models of requirement specifications for telecommunication applications. In: Proceedings of the Region 8 IEEE EUROCON 2009 Conference 2009, pp. 122–129 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Baranov, S., Kapitonova, J., Letichevsky, A., Volkov, V., Weigert, T.: Basic protocols, message sequence charts, and verification of requirements specifications. Comput. Netw. 49(5), 661–675 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Baranov, S., Kotlyarov, V., Weigert, T.: Verifiable coverage criteria for automated testing. In: Ober, I., Ober, I. (eds.) SDL 2011. LNCS, vol. 7083, pp. 79–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25264-8_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Kolchin, A., et al.: An approach to creating concretized test scenarios within test automation technology for industrial software projects. Autom. Control Comput. Sci. 47(7), 433–442 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Buhr, R.: Use Case Maps for Object-Oriented Systems. Pearson, London (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. International Telecommunications Union. User Requirements Notation Z-151 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kolchin, A.V.: An automatic method for the dynamic construction of abstractions of states of a formal model. Cybern. Syst. Anal. 46(4), 583–601 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Kolchin, A.V.: Interactive method for cumulative analysis of software formal models behavior. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Programming UkrPROG2018, CEUR-WS, vol. 2139, pp. 115–123 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Guba, A., et al.: A method for business logic extraction from legacy COBOL code of industrial systems. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Programming UkrPROG2016, CEUR-WS, vol. 1631, pp. 17–25 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Robot Framework User Guide. http://robotframework.org/robotframework/#user-guide

  16. Tip, F.: A survey of program slicing techniques. J. Program. Lang. 3, 121–189 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Weiser, M.: Program slices: formal, psychological and practical investigations of an automatic program abstraction method. Ph.D. thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Korel, B., Laski, J.: Dynamic program slicing. Inf. Process. Lett. 29(3), 155–163 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ottenstein, K., Ottenstein, L.: The program dependence graph in a software development environment. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT/SIGPLAN Software Engineering Symposium on Practical Software Development Environments, pp. 177–184 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Aho, A., Ullman, J.: Compilers: Principles, Techniques, and Tools. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Andersen, L.: Program analysis and specialization for the C programming language. Ph.D. thesis, DIEM, University of Copenhagen (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hardekopf, B., Lin, C.: The ant and the grasshopper: fast and accurate pointer analysis for millions of lines of code. In: Programming Language Design and Implementation (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Weiser, M.: Program slicing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 10(4), 352–357 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Horwitz, S., Reps, T., Binkley, D.: Interprocedural slicing using dependence graphs. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 12(1), 26–61 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hwang, J., Du, M., Chou, C.: Finding program slices for recursive procedures. In: Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Computer Software and Application Conference, Chicago (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Su, T., et al.: A survey on data-flow testing. ACM Comput. Surv. 50, 5 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Dssouli, R., et al.: Testing the control-flow, data-flow, and time aspects of communication systems: a survey. Adv. Comput. 107, 95–155 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Volkov, V., et al.: A survey of systematic methods for code-based test data generation. Artif. Intell. 2, 71–85 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Campos, J., Ge, Y., Fraser, G., Eler, M., Arcuri, A.: An empirical evaluation of evolutionary algorithms for test suite generation. In: Menzies, T., Petke, J. (eds.) SSBSE 2017. LNCS, vol. 10452, pp. 33–48. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66299-2_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Beyer, D., Gulwani, S., Schmidt, D.A.: Combining model checking and data-flow analysis. Handbook of Model Checking, pp. 493–540. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10575-8_16

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Cadar, C., Sen, K.: Symbolic execution for software testing: three decades later. Commun. ACM 56(2), 82–90 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hessel, A., Petterson, P.: A global algorithm for model-based test suite generation. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 190, 47–59 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Trabish, D., Mattavelli, A., Cadar, C.: Chopped symbolic execution. In: Proceedings of ICSE 2018 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kuznetsov, V., et al.: Efficient state merging in symbolic execution. ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 193–204 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Boonstoppel, P., Cadar, C., Engler, D.: RWset: attacking path explosion in constraint-based test generation. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 351–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Hong, H.S., Ural, H.: Dependence testing: extending data flow testing with control dependence. In: Khendek, F., Dssouli, R. (eds.) TestCom 2005. LNCS, vol. 3502, pp. 23–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11430230_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Kolchin, A., Potiyenko, S., Weigert, T.: Challenges for automated, model-based test scenario generation. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Information and Software Technologies, 12 p. (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Rapps, S., Weyuker, E.: Data flow analysis techniques for test data selection. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of Software Engineering, pp. 272–277 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kolchin, A.: A novel algorithm for attacking path explosion in model-based test generation for data flow coverage. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 1st International Conference on System Analysis and Intelligent Computing, SAIC (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Maiya, P., Gupta, R., Kanade, A., Majumdar, R.: Partial order reduction for event-driven multi-threaded programs. In: Chechik, M., Raskin, J.-F. (eds.) TACAS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9636, pp. 680–697. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_44

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ISS, Kyiv, Ukraine

    Oleg Gurenko, Valentyn Banas, Roman Chetvertak & Roman Yagodka

  2. V.M. Glushkov Institute of Cybernetics of the NAS of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine

    Alexander Kolchin, Stepan Potiyenko & Vlad Volkov

  3. Uniquesoft LLC, Palatine, IL, USA

    Thomas Weigert & Aswin van den Berg

Authors
  1. Thomas Weigert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander Kolchin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stepan Potiyenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Oleg Gurenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aswin van den Berg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Valentyn Banas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Roman Chetvertak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Roman Yagodka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Vlad Volkov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Weigert .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

    Pau Fonseca i Casas

  2. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

    Maria-Ribera Sancho

  3. Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK

    Edel Sherratt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Weigert, T. et al. (2019). Generating Test Suites to Validate Legacy Systems. In: Fonseca i Casas, P., Sancho, MR., Sherratt, E. (eds) System Analysis and Modeling. Languages, Methods, and Tools for Industry 4.0. SAM 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11753. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30690-8_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30690-8_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-30689-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-30690-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation