Thus it was written in the epistle of Steve Dirickson (Volt),
> > The other thing that is/should be done alongside regression
> > testing is 'path
> > flow analysis'. This verifies that a high percentage of the
> > logic branches
> > have been exercised in the test sequence.
>
> Though it's important to recognize that coverage testing, either line
> coverage or branch coverage, isn't going to come anywhere near detecting all
> the defects in the code. Kaner cites Beizer's estimate that complete
> coverage, i.e. taking every possible path out of every branch point, will
> detect--at best--half the defects.

Could you give a summary explanation of why?  To my inexperienced mind, that
seems somewhat counterintuitive.

Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([log in to unmask]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
          ==========================================================
Sir, I have found you an argument. I am not obliged to find you an
understanding.
                        -- Johnson, Samuel (1709-1784)
          ==========================================================
         Deep thought to be found at http://www.southern.edu/~ashted

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *