Inspection's role in software quality assurance
暂无分享,去创建一个
0 7 4 0 7 4 5 9 / 0 3 / $ 1 7 . 0 0 © 2 0 0 3 I E E E Researchers have responded to these problems by studying methods of formal correctness verification for programs. In theory, we now know how to prove programs correct with the same degree of rigor that we apply to mathematical theorems. In reality, this is rarely practical and even more rarely done. Most research papers on verification make simplifying assumptions (for example, a 1:1 correspondence between variables and variable names) that aren’t valid for real programs. Proofs of realistic programs involve long, complex expressions and require patience, time, and diligence that developers don’t think they have. (Interestingly enough, they never have time to verify a program before release, but they must take time to respond to complaints after release.) Inspection methods can be more effective than informal reviews and require less effort than formal focus
[1] Michael E. Fagan. Design and Code Inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development , 1976, IBM Syst. J..
[2] Peter J. Middleton,et al. Software Inspection , 1994, J. Inf. Technol..
[3] David Lorge Parnas,et al. Active design reviews: principles and practices , 1985, ICSE '85.
[4] Claes Wohlin,et al. State‐of‐the‐art: software inspections after 25 years , 2002, Softw. Test. Verification Reliab..