Method and system for testing and analyzing user interfaces

• US 9,098,635 B2
• Filed: 06/20/2008
• Issued: 08/04/2015
• Est. Priority Date: 06/20/2008
• Status: Expired due to Fees

• Current Assignee: Cadence Design Systems Incorporated (Cadence Group)
• Original Assignee: Cadence Design Systems Incorporated (Cadence Group)
• Inventors: Peri-Glass, Yaron, O'Riordan, Don J., Brand, Erica
• Primary Examiner(s): Zhen, Li B
• Assistant Examiner(s): BODDEN, EVRAL E
• Application Number:
  US12/143,174
• Publication Number:
  US 20090320002A1
• Time in Patent Office: 2,601 Days
• Field of Search: None
• US Class Current: 1/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/3688 for test execution, e.g. scheduling of test suites
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/38 for implementing user interfaces

Abstract

A system and method is described in which the state of the art in automated software applications is significantly improved. According to some approaches, interface testing is implemented and based upon a verification language and a verification environment. The system and method support the concepts of constrained random test generation, coverage, constrained random generation, and dynamic checks.

Claims

1. A method for testing a user interface for an application comprising:

extending a hardware verification language by defining one or more custom libraries such that the extended hardware verification language can be used to interface with a user interface to a software application in addition to hardware designs, wherein the hardware verification language is different from a programming language used to create the user interface to the software application, and is a programming language specifically designed for verification of hardware designs, and wherein the extended hardware verification language is extended by providing an API (applications programming interface) corresponding to the e language;

generating a test for the user interface to the software application written in the extended hardware verification language;

using the test written in the extended hardware verification language to drive one or more elements of the user interface to the software application;

collecting data resulting from driving the user interface to the software application using the test;

analyzing the data from driving the user interface to the software application; and

displaying analysis results or storing the analysis results in a computer readable medium.

2. The method of claim 1 in which the test comprises randomly generated test elements.

3. The method of claim 2 in which the randomly generated test elements are constrained to allowable values.

4. The method of claim 2 in which the test is authored using a template, where at least one or more specific values for the test is randomly generated.

5. The method of claim 1 in which the test comprises a specific sequence of actions.

6. The method of claim 1 in which the test is re-used for a different application user interface.

7. The method of claim 1 further comprising performing regression testing upon the user interface to the software application.

8. The method of claim 7 in which the regression testing comprises multiple tests, a randomly generated test, passed/fail test checks, or automatically re-run tests.

9. The method of claim 7 in which the regression testing is performed using a hardware regression testing tool.

10. The method of claim 1 further comprising coverage analysis.

11. The method of claim 10 in which state coverage is analyzed.

12. The method of claim 10 in which low or missing coverage is identified.

13. The method of claim 10 in which a coverage grade is generated for the test.

14. The method of claim 1 in which the data is collected by querying the application interface.

15. The method of claim 1 in which the user interface to the software application comprises a graphical user interface, web-based interface, or character-based interface.

16. The method of claim 1 in which a naming mechanism is used to refer to a specific component within the user interface to the software application.

17. The method of claim 1 in which the test is debugged using a verification language debugging tool.

18. The method of claim 17 in which the verification language debugging tool performs the act of (a) setting breakpoints on lines, methods, change of a value;

(b) exploring a stack when program execution stops;

(c) adding watch-points, that are evaluated after a stop;

(d) performing step-in, step-over and step-back program language statements;

(e) choosing a variable for evaluation;

(f) adding/deleting/disabling/enabling breakpoints;

or (g) setting conditional breakpoints.

19. The method of claim 1, wherein the hardware verification language is e.

20. A system for testing a user interface for an application, comprising:

a memory configured to hold executable code comprising instructions for testing a user interface to a software application;

a processor communicable with the memory, configured to execute the executable code;

a test written in an extended hardware verification language, wherein the hardware verification language has been extending by defining one or more custom libraries such that the extended hardware verification language can be used to interface with the user interface to the software application in addition to hardware designs, and wherein the hardware verification language is different from a programming language used to create the user interface to the software application, and is a programming language specifically designed for verification of hardware designs, and wherein the extended hardware verification language is extended by providing an API (applications programming interface) corresponding to the e language;

and wherein the test written in the hardware verification language is configured to drive one or more elements of the user interface to the software application.

21. The system of claim 20 comprising a testbench in communication with an application under test, in which the testbench comprises the test and the application under test comprises the user interface to the software application.

22. The system of claim 21 in which the application under test comprises a plug-in to interface with the testbench, wherein the plug-in is configured to interface with one or more types of applications.

23. The system of claim 22 in which the plug-in is extendable, and may be configured to interface with customized interface components.

24. The system of claim 21 in which the testbench comprises an applications programming interface, the applications programming interface being configured to interact with or implement the test.

25. The system of claim 20 in which the test comprises one or more components from a library.

26. The system of claim 20 in which multiple interface mechanisms are employed to test multiple applications under test.

27. The system of claim 20 in which the test addresses at least one or more of the classes that include an application, a window, a widget, or a verification manager.

28. The system of claim 20, wherein the hardware verification language is e.

29. A computer program product that includes a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, the computer readable medium comprising a plurality of computer instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to execute performing a process for testing a user interface to a software application, the process comprising:

extending a hardware verification language by defining one or more custom libraries such that the extended hardware verification language can be used to interface with the user interface to the software application in addition to hardware designs, wherein the hardware verification language is different from a programming language used to create the user interface to the software application, and is a programming language specifically designed for verification of hardware designs, and wherein the extended hardware verification language is extended by providing an API (applications programming interface) corresponding to the e language;

generating a test for the user interface to the software application written in the extended hardware verification language;

using the test written in the extended hardware verification language to drive one or more elements of the user interface to the software application;

collecting data resulting from driving the user interface to the software application using the test;

analyzing the data from driving the user interface to the software application; and

displaying analysis results or storing the analysis results in a computer readable medium.

30. The computer program product of claim 29 in which the test comprises randomly generated test elements.

31. The computer program product of claim 29 in which the test is reused for a different application user interface.

32. The computer program product of claim 29 further comprising performing regression testing upon the user interface to the software application.

33. The computer program product of claim 29 further comprising coverage analysis.

34. The computer program product of claim 29 in which the test is debugged using a verification language debugging tool.

35. The computer program product of claim 29, wherein the hardware verification language is e.