Talk:System testing
Appearance
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Limitations
What are the Limitations of system testing??
- Well, the way I see it, system testing and functional testing are really two different things, and the article should from a neutrality point of view at least make the statement that the wording around testing is not very fixed as of now. System testing to me occurs at the system level, testing functional, as well as non-functional aspects of the software. Tprosser 12:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- System tests the whole system, functionally and non-functionally. But functional testing can apply to anything from a whole system, down to an individual code class. So system testing is about scope, and functional testing is more of a design technique. DRogers 19:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Redirect from Functional Testing
I disagree with the redirect from Functional Testing to this page about System Testing. They are two different things. Functional Testing is all about systematic test-generation from specifications, and applies to units and systems; and contrasts with Structural Testing, which is code-based. System Testing applies to any large-scale integration testing, using any approach which observes how the various units interact. AJHSimons (talk) 16:01, 1 April 2008
- I agree --188.2.192.144 (talk) 16:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Agree with all the people who disagree with the redirect. These are very different things. 79.142.241.70 (talk) 12:46, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
- Also disagree with the redirect, system testing is integration, functional testing does not imply integration. Zaphodikus (talk) 11:56, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- There are two replies on the Functional Testing talk page that echo these concerns. It looks like the 'Functional testing' page has [gone through several different redirects in its history]. Does anyone have a good reference for a definition of Functional Testing? If so we could perhaps keep it as its own article and flesh it out. --Culix (talk) 19:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, the book "Testing Computer Software" has the following definition:
- "Functional testing is a type of black box testing. Functions are tested by feeding them input and examining the output. Internal program structure is rarely considered." Kaner, Falk, Nguyen. Testing Computer Software. Wiley Computer Publishing, 1999, p. 42. ISBN 0-471-35846-0.
- They further differentiate between functional testing and system testing by saying functional testing "*verif[ies]* a program by checking it against ... design document(s) or specification(s)", while system testing "*validate[s]* a program by checking it against the published user or system requirements".
- Based on this I believe that functional testing and system testing are two different things, and should have their own articles. Kaner, Falk, and Nguyen seem to be saying that functional testing checks whether parts of the program behave correctly, while system testing operates on the entire structure, and determines if the thing does what people want. This article event currently begins with "System testing ... is testing conducted on a complete, integrated system to evaluate the system's compliance with its specified requirements", so I think that agrees.
- Furthermore, splitting up functional and system testing would make the wikipedia testing articles consistent - Black-box testing currently reads "This method of test can be applied to all levels of software testing: unit, integration, functional, system and acceptance", thereby indicating its belief that function and system testing are two different things.
- So, I am going to be bold and move Functional testing back to its own article. There are some things on the talk page there that also need to be cleared up, but let's move one step at a time. Please post here if you agree or disagree. --Culix (talk) 05:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)