Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

M.-H. Durand

dblp:31/2494 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2000
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Theory of computation · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software testing · 87% Requirements engineering and software design · 13%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing
integration testing
0.012000
Testing levels for object-oriented software · ICSE 2000
Software testing
object-oriented testing
0.012000
Testing levels for object-oriented software · ICSE 2000
Requirements engineering and software design › model-driven engineering › UML
UML class diagrams
0.012000
Testing levels for object-oriented software · ICSE 2000

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

class diagram analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2000 Testing levels for object-oriented software
abstract
One of the characteristics of object-oriented software is the complex dependency that may exist between classes due to inheritance, association and aggregation relationships. Hence, where to start testing and how to define an integration strategy are issues that require further investigation. This paper presents an approach to define a test order by exploiting a model produced during design stages (e.g., using OMT, UML), namely the class diagram. Our goal is to minimize the number of stubs to be constructed in order to decrease the cost of testing. This is done by testing a class after the classes it depends on. The novelty of the test order lies in the fact that it takes account of: (i) dynamic (polymorphism) dependencies; (ii) abstract classes that cannot be instantiated, making some testing levels infeasible. The test order is represented by a graph showing which testing levels must be done in sequence and which ones may be done independently. It also provides information about the classes involved in each level and how they are involved (e.g., instantiation or not). The approach is implemented in a tool called TOONS (Testing level generator for Object-OrieNted Software). It is applied to an industrial case study from the avionics domain.
Yvan Labiche, Pascale Thévenod-Fosse, Hélène Waeselynck, M.-H. Durand
ICSE4
1987 A Set of Combinators for Abstraction in Linear Space
Michel Castan, M.-H. Durand, Michel Lemaître
Inf. Process. Lett.2