Ideas/suggestions

  • Idea
  • Updated 5 years ago
  • Planned
I just wanted to share the following into this forum to possibly help generate ideas for other users.
1. Prepopulate the ‘any values’ with suggested or specific values
2. Some projects already have their parameters and levels defined in an Excel file format. Instead of inputting this list into the tool, can we have the ability to import the parameters and levels into Hexawise?
3. It will be more convenient for users to analyze the following, invalid pairs, value expansions, if these can be exported to an Excel file for example.
Photo of Ed

Ed

  • 25 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
  • happy

Posted 6 years ago

  • 2
Photo of Justin Hunter, Hexawise Founder

Justin Hunter, Hexawise Founder, Founder and CEO

  • 233 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
Ed,

Have you been spying on our product development pipeline meetings this month? :)

Agreed to all three suggestions! I like the way you think. Please keep your suggestions coming. We have a couple other priority enhancement that we'll be working on first, but we'll be adding all three of your ideas.

Justin
Photo of Ed

Ed

  • 25 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I have a Country and Metro City dependencies. In this example i only used two values and declared the invalid pairs (Canada-Manila and Philippines-Ontario).
Because the 'any value' is in place, this can create confusions especially if the combinations are not so obvious. A new tester for example who does not understand completely certain dependencies might input here an invalid value.
Photo of Justin Hunter, Hexawise Founder

Justin Hunter, Hexawise Founder, Founder and CEO

  • 233 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
Ed,

You're uncanny. It's like you have a microphone recording our company's internal conversations. :)

Yes. I agree (again) with your insightful suggestion. It would be an improvement to make those outputs more clear. One solution could be to simply (a) create plausible values (that respect constraint / invalid pairs ruls), and also (b) indicate that such values are not necessary to execute for purposes of the coverage criteria specified by the user via some kind of formatting (say, e.g., putting such values in italics).

Why won't we just put plausible values in and ignore the italics? It could be useful for a user to know which values he's free to adjust without risk of messing up the thoroughness objectives he's specified (e.g., 2-way tests or 4-way tests). The message will be (for those users sophisticated enough to interpret what the italics mean): "feel free to adjust the values that are in italics (or not bother executing that step at all). Don't adjust/alter the other values, though or you'll risk losing 100% coverage of, e.g., all possible pairs of values."
Photo of Sean Johnson

Sean Johnson, CTO

  • 263 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
Ed,

Just to clarify a bit on your request #3. Invalid Pairs and Value Expansions are included in the Excel export already. The exported Excel file has multiple sheets and there are sheets for Invalid Pairs and Value Expansions.

Thanks,
Sean
Photo of Ed

Ed

  • 25 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I thought we did away with the use of "any value", and have pre-populated it with plausible value. I saw this happen last week. But today i'm seeing "any value" that was just created by a colleague. Can you please clarify the current position on this? I'm pasting a picture for your reference.
Photo of Sean Johnson

Sean Johnson, CTO

  • 263 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
Ed,

We did away with "any value" except for one case. All the purple, italicized values you are seeing in the screen shot are cases where, in the past, we would have said "any value". Instead we now put a value there based on respecting invalid pairs and on some simple priority heuristics.

But also in your screenshot, as you point out, you see some purple, italicized values that still say "any value". What's going on there? What's happening is that while no specific value has to be there for pair coverage, there actually is no possible value that we can put there based on the other values and the invalid pairs. Any value we might substitute in there would violate an invalid pair.

Please check these test cases that have an "any value" for a parameter against the invalid pairs for this plan to confirm that this is the case.

So the natural question then is, what does this mean to me? Depending on the details of your system under test, it may mean that you put in whatever value you want for "any value", and it will be testing a case that you don't have to test (hence it's marked by an invalid pair), but that you can test. Or it could mean that you can't actually execute this test case.

What to do in this scenario is a known issue and open question for us. I'm very interested in hearing what the real world impact for you of having these "any values" is. It can help inform us of where to go with this issue.

Thanks,
Sean