Figure 8'1 HewlettPackard fault classification Grady 1997'

1
Figure 8.1 Hewlett-Packard fault classification
(Grady 1997).
2
Figure 8.2 Faults for one Hewlett-Packard
division (Grady 1997).
3
Figure 8.3 Testing steps.
4
Figure 8.4 Example logic structure.
5
Figure 8.5 Flow diagram for array rearrangement.
6
Figure 8.6 Relative strengths of test strategies
(Beizer 1990).
7
Figure 8.7 Logic flow.
8
Figure 8.8 Example component hierarchy.
9
Figure 8.9 bottom-up testing.
10
Figure 8.10 Top-down testing.
11
Figure 8.11 Modified top-down testing.
12
Figure 8.12 Big-bang testing.
13
Figure 8.13 Sandwich testing.
14
Figure 8.14 Modified sandwich testing.
15
Figure 8.15 Microsoft synch-and-stabilize
approach.
16
Figure 8.16 Easier and harder parts of testing
object-oriented systems (Graham 1966a).
17
Figure 8.17 Significant aspects of the testing
domain where object-oriented testing is different
(Graham 1996a)
18
Figure 8.18 Object from static analysis.
19
Figure 8.19 Probability of finding faults during
development.
20
Figure 8.20 Classification tree to identify
fault-prone components.
21
Figure 8.21 Graph for program in Figure 8.7.
22
Figure 8.22 Example of component hierarchy.