Test Case Generation 2016
Since its inception, IT has been about deploying technology to automate business processes. However, it has been slow to apply that concept to itself. In part, because IT departments are primarily tasked with serving the business; and improving their own performance so that they can better serve the business. Automating IT is all too often regarded as secondary because budget is often not forthcoming for this purpose. However, this is a short-sighted view. The cost to the business, when test teams perform manual software testing, usually results in more defects, detected later in the development lifecycle. This always results in higher costs: going back and remedying defects after an application has shipped.
Bloor Research believes – and this is discussed in detail in our Spotlight paper “Automated test case generation” – that while automating test case generation isn’t sufficient on its own to ensure fully functional and accurate application development, it is absolutely necessary. Without tying test cases to requirements, testing will continue to be ad hoc, time consuming, inefficient and sometimes wasteful. In this
In this paper we compare and examine the different products available in the market, for this purpose. In practice, while there are a large number of utilities available to support test case generation there are not many enterprise grade solutions around. This Introduction report considers the solutions available from Bender, CA Technologies, Cognizant, Conformiq, Hexawise, McCabe and TestCover, as well as the Cucumber and SpecFlow products. All these use distinctly different approaches (some use more than one) for automating and managing the process of test case generation. We will examine the most common testing approaches, their strengths and weaknesses, and the vendors that offer them.