Spelling suggestions: "subject:"dualidade dde requisitos"" "subject:"dualidade dde resquisitos""
1 |
Question-based checklist to evaluate BDD scenarios' qualityOliveira, Gabriel Pimentel Affonso de 14 March 2018 (has links)
Submitted by PPG Ci?ncia da Computa??o (ppgcc@pucrs.br) on 2018-05-08T18:28:23Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
GABRIEL_PIMENTEL_AFFONSO_DE_OLIVEIRA_DIS.pdf: 1728021 bytes, checksum: ccf1b372e65c1d0cf709157eeb0723ca (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Caroline Xavier (caroline.xavier@pucrs.br) on 2018-05-15T18:27:29Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
GABRIEL_PIMENTEL_AFFONSO_DE_OLIVEIRA_DIS.pdf: 1728021 bytes, checksum: ccf1b372e65c1d0cf709157eeb0723ca (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-05-15T18:37:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
GABRIEL_PIMENTEL_AFFONSO_DE_OLIVEIRA_DIS.pdf: 1728021 bytes, checksum: ccf1b372e65c1d0cf709157eeb0723ca (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2018-03-14 / Tradicionalmente, a engenharia de requisitos se baseia na execu??o sequencial de atividades. Por outro lado, a engenharia de requisitos em metodologias ?geis ? informal. Projetos ?geis s?o bem sucedidos ?sem requisitos? gra?as ao fato de que casos de teste s?o comumentemente vistos como requisitos e de que requisitos s?o detalhados como casos de teste que servem tambem para validar e aceitar cada funcionalidade. Um dos formato destes testes de aceita??o s?o cen?rios criados a partir da t?cnica de desenvolvimento orientado a comportamento (do ingl?s, behavior-driven development, BDD). Estes cen?rios ajudam a evitar problemas de comunica??o entre especialistas de dom?nio e programadores, j? que estes cen?rios s?o escritos numa linguagem comum a esses dois grupos, permitindo um caminho menos amb?guo dos requisitos de neg?cio para a especifica??o do comportamento do um software. Entretanto, aqueles que formalizam cen?rios BDD n?o possuem um conjunto padr?o de regras para se familiarizarem com o conceito de um ?bom? cen?rio, o que pode permitir que cen?rios BDD sofram de problemas conhecidos pela engenharia de requisitos, tais como requisitos incompletos, mal especificados ou inconsistentes. Portanto, para preencher essa lacuna, nessa pesquisa foram coletados dados de entrevistas semi-estruturadas com praticantes de BDD para propormos uma lista de verifica??o baseada em quest?es com 12 perguntas associadas a 8 atributos de qualidade. Esse instrumento deve prover aos praticantes de BDD orienta??es padronizadas para o refinamento de seus cen?rios. / Traditional requirements engineering approaches are based on a sequential execution of activities. In the other hand, requirements engineering in agile development is informal. Agile projects succeed ?without requirements? due to the fact that test cases are commonly viewed as requirements and detailed requirements are documented as test cases that also validate and accept each feature. One format of those acceptance test cases is Behavior-Driven Development scenarios. Those scenarios help to avoid communication problems between the domain experts and programmers on the team, as they are defined using a common language that allows for an easy, less ambiguous path from end-user business requirements to the specification of how the software should behave. However, those who formalize BDD scenarios do not have a standard set of rules to educate themselves on what a ?good? BDD scenario is, which can allow BDD scenarios to suffer from other known problems in requirement engineering such as incomplete, underspecified and inconsistent requirements. Therefore, to fill that gap, this research gathered data from semi-structures interviews performed with BDD practitioners to propose a question-based checklist based on 8 newly defined quality attributes. This question-based checklist provides practitioners with an standard guideline for BDD scenarios? refinement
|
Page generated in 0.0771 seconds