CIS 422/522

Notes on Static Analysis (Emphasis on Inspections)
Q:Why is it needed?
A: To combat human nature
Weinberg refers to Cognitive Dissonance as the human tendency to self-justify actions. Since we tend not to see evidence that conflicts with our strongly held beliefs, our ability to find errors in our own work is impaired.


Common/Accepted evaluation activities
Reviews
Inspections
Walkthroughs
Tests
Interviews
  • Not a perfect science/no guarantee, but very effective; usually caches different defects than testing.
  • Like all evaluation activities, need intended/specified result; some process/method of review.


    • Reviews and Walkthroughs
  • Generally, less formal
  • Reviews & Walkthroughs can be done for management or peers
  • Example: SRS Review (or Walkthrough)
  • Content Criteria: Complete, Implementation Independent (What, not How)
  • Unambiguous, Consistent, Precise, Verifiable, Producible, Traceable
  • Packaging Criteria: Modifiable, Readable, Organized for Reference and Review
    • "The calculator program should add two numbers and display the result."


    Inspections
    Michael Fagan was the pioneer
    Primarily done with Design and Code
    Objectives
  • Find errors as early as possible
  • Ensure that appropriate parties technically agree on the work
  • Verify that work meets predefined criteria
  • Formally complete a technical task
  • Provide data on the inspection process


    • The Inspection Process - Basic Principles
  • Inspection is a formal, structured process with checklists and defined roles.
  • Generic standards and checklists are created for each type, and customized as appropriate
  • The reviewers are prepared in advance
  • The focus of the inspection [meeting] is on identifying problems, not resolving them.
  • An inspection is conducted by technical people for technical people.
    • Participants
  • Moderator
  • Producer(s)
  • Reviewers
  • Recorder
    • The Process
  • Prep (input criteria established and verified)
  • Inspection [meeting]
  • Resolution of reported defects; possible follow-up inspections (if enough changes)
    • lloyd.madden@dynamix.com
    glenw@uswest.net
    johnfl@cs.uoregon.edu