Invariants and state in testing and formal methods

Logical formulas called invariants are a staple of formal methods for program analysis. Persistent-state variables appear in these formulas playing their proper intuitive role, which is somewhere between inputs and internal variables. In software testing theory, on the contrary, state is not usually accorded explicit treatment. Comparing the viewpoints of formal methods and testing theory suggests new roles that formal methods can play in testing. This examination is motivated by recent systems such as Daikon, which use both tests and invariants.

[1]  David S. Rosenblum.  A Practical Approach to Programming With Assertions , 1995, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[2]  Amer Diwan,et al.  Discovering Algebraic Specifications from Java Classes , 2003, ECOOP.

[3]  David Notkin,et al.  Tool-assisted unit-test generation and selection based on operational abstractions , 2006, Automated Software Engineering.

[4]  Neelam Gupta,et al.  A new structural coverage criterion for dynamic detection of program invariants , 2003, 18th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings..

[5]  Matthew M. Geller.  Test data as an aid in proving program correctness , 1976, POPL.

[6]  John B. Goodenough,et al.  Toward a theory of test data selection , 1975 .

[7]  C. A. R. HOARE,et al.  An axiomatic basis for computer programming , 1969, CACM.

[8]  Matthew M. Geller.  Test data as an aid in proving program correctness , 1978, CACM.

[9]  Robert W. Floyd,et al.  Assigning Meanings to Programs , 1993 .

[10]  William G. Griswold,et al.  Dynamically discovering likely program invariants to support program evolution , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002).

[11]  Sarfraz Khurshid,et al.  TestEra: a novel framework for automated testing of Java programs , 2001, Proceedings 16th Annual International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001).