MI0033 SET-1 &amp SET-2

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY
SOFTWARE ENGINEERING SUBJECT CODE MI0033 Assignment Set- 1

Q1. Quality and reliability are related concepts but are fundamentally different in a number of ways. Discuss them. Answer: One of the challenges of software quality is that "everyone feels they understand it. In addition to more software specific definitions given below, there are several applicable definitions of quality which are used in business. Software quality may be defined as conformance to explicitly stated functional and performance requirements, explicitly documented development standards and implicit characteristics that are expected of all professionally developed software. The three key points in this definition:
1.
Software requirements are the foundations from which quality is measured. Lack of conformance to requirement is lack of quality.
2.
Specified standards define a set of development criteria that guide the management in software engineering. If criteria are not followed lack of quality will usually result.
3.
A set of implicit requirements often goes unmentioned, for example ease of use, maintainability etc. If software conforms to its explicit requirements but fails to meet implicit
requirements, software quality is suspected. A definition in Steve McConnell's Code Complete divides software into two pieces: internal and external quality characteristics. External quality characteristics are those parts of a product that face its users, where internal quality characteristics are those that do not.[4]
SANTOSH GOWDA.H 3rd semester, Disha institute of management and technology Mobile No.: 9986840143 Reg No.: 521075728
Another definition by Dr. Tom De Marco says "a product's quality is a function of how much it changes the world for the better. This can be interpreted as meaning that user satisfaction is more important than anything in determining software quality. Another definition, coined by Gerald Weinberg in Quality Software Management: Systems Thinking, is "Quality is value to some person." This definition stresses that quality is inherently subjective - different people will experience the quality of the same software very differently. One strength of this definition is the questions it invites software teams to consider, such as "Who are the people we want to value our software?" and "What will be valuable to them?" Software product quality Product quality conformance to requirements or program specification; related to Reliability Scalability Correctness Completeness Absence of bugs Fault-tolerance Extensibility Maintainability Documentation The Consortium for IT Software Quality (CISQ) was launched in 2009 to standardize the measurement of software product quality. The Consortium's goal is to bring together industry executives from Global 2000 IT organizations, system integrators, outsourcers, and package vendors to jointly address the challenge of standardizing the measurement of IT software quality and to promote a market-based ecosystem to support its deployment. It is essential to supplement traditional testing functional, nonfunctional, and run-time with measures of application structural quality.
Structural quality is the quality of the applications architecture and the degree to which its implementation accords with software engineering best practices. Industry data demonstrate that poor application structural quality results in cost and schedule overruns and creates waste in the form of rework (up to 45% of development time in some organizations). Moreover, poor structural quality is strongly correlated with high-impact business disruptions due to corrupted data, application outages, security breaches, and performance problems. As in any other field of engineering, an application with good structural software quality costs less to maintain and is easier to understand and change in response to pressing business needs. Source code quality A computer has no concept of "well-written" source code. However, from a human point of view source code can be written in a way that has an effect on the effort needed to comprehend its behavior. Many source code programming style guides, which often stress readability and usually language-specific conventions are aimed at reducing the cost of source code maintenance. Some of the issues that affect code quality include: Readability Ease of maintenance, testing, debugging, fixing, modification and portability Low complexity Low resource consumption: memory, CPU Number of compilation or lint warnings Robust input validation and error handling, established by software fault injection Methods to improve the quality: Refactoring Code Inspection or software review Documenting the code
Reg No.: 521075728
SANTOSH GOWDA.H 3rd semester, Disha institute of management and technology Mobile No.: 9986840143
Software reliability Software reliability is an important facet of software quality. It is defined as "the probability of failure-free operation of a computer program in a specified environment for a specified time". One of reliability's distinguishing characteristics is that it is objective, measurable, and can be estimated, whereas much of software quality is subjective criteria.[7] This distinction is especially important in the discipline of Software Quality Assurance. These measured criteria are typically called software metrics. Goal of reliability The need for a means to objectively determine software reliability comes from the desire to apply the techniques of contemporary engineering fields to the development of software. That desire is a result of the common observation, by both lay-persons and specialists, that computer software does not work the way it ought to. In other words, software is seen to exhibit undesirable behavior, up to and including outright failure, with consequences for the data which is processed, the machinery on which the software runs, and by extension the people and materials which those machines might negatively affect. The more critical the application of the software to economic and production processes, or to lifesustaining systems, the more important is the need to assess the software's reliability. Regardless of the criticality of any single software application, it is also more and more frequently observed that software has penetrated deeply into almost every aspect of modern life through the technology we use. It is only expected that this infiltration will continue, along with an accompanying dependency on the software by the systems which maintain our society. As software becomes more and more crucial to the operation of the systems on which we depend, the argument goes, it only follows that the software should offer a concomitant level of dependability. In other words, the software should behave in the way it is intended, or even better, in the way it should.
Reg No.: 521075728
Challenge of reliability The circular logic of the preceding sentence is not accidentalit is meant to illustrate a fundamental problem in the issue of measuring software reliability, which is the difficulty of determining, in advance, exactly how the software is intended to operate. The problem seems to stem from a common conceptual error in the consideration of software, which is that software in some sense takes on a role which would otherwise be filled by a human being. This is a problem on two levels. Firstly, most modern software performs work which a human could never perform, especially at the high level of reliability that is often expected from software in comparison to humans. Secondly, software is fundamentally incapable of most of the mental capabilities of humans which separate them from mere mechanisms: qualities such as adaptability, general-purpose knowledge, a sense of conceptual and functional context, and common sense. Nevertheless, most software programs could safely be considered to have a particular, even singular purpose. If the possibility can be allowed that said purpose can be well or even completely defined, it should present a means for at least considering objectively whether the software is, in fact, reliable, by comparing the expected outcome to the actual outcome of running the software in a given environment, with given data. Unfortunately, it is still not known whether it is possible to exhaustively determine either the expected outcome or the actual outcome of the entire set of possible environment and input data to a given program, without which it is probably impossible to determine the program's reliability with any certainty. However, various attempts are in the works to attempt to rein in the vastness of the space of software's environmental and input variables, both for actual programs and theoretical descriptions of programs. Such attempts to improve software reliability can be applied at different stages of a program's development, in the case of real software. These stages principally include: requirements, design, programming, testing, and runtime evaluation. The study of theoretical software reliability is predominantly concerned with the concept of correctness, a mathematical field of computer science which is an outgrowth of language and automata theory.
Reliability in program development Requirements A program cannot be expected to work as desired if the developers of the program do not, in fact, know the program's desired behaviour in advance, or if they cannot at least determine its desired behaviour in parallel with development, in sufficient detail. What level of detail is considered sufficient is hotly debated. The idea of perfect detail is attractive, but may be impractical, if not actually impossible. This is because the desired behaviour tends to change as the possible range of the behaviour is determined through actual attempts, or more accurately, failed attempts, to achieve it. Whether a program's desired behaviour can be successfully specified in advance is a moot point if the behaviour cannot be specified at all, and this is the focus of attempts to formalize the process of creating requirements for new software projects. In situ with the formalization effort is an attempt to help inform non-specialists, particularly non-programmers, who commission software projects without sufficient knowledge of what computer software is in fact capable. Communicating this knowledge is made more difficult by the fact that, as hinted above, even programmers cannot always know in advance what is actually possible for software in advance of trying. Design While requirements are meant to specify what a program should do, design is meant, at least at a high level, to specify how the program should do it. The usefulness of design is also questioned by some, but those who look to formalize the process of ensuring reliability often offer good software design processes as the most significant means to accomplish it. Software design usually involves the use of more abstract and general means of specifying the parts of the software and what they do. As such, it can be seen as a way to break a large program down into many smaller programs, such that those smaller pieces together do the work of the whole program.
Reg No.: 521075728
The purposes of high-level design are as follows. It separates what are considered to be problems of architecture, or overall program concept and structure, from problems of actual coding, which solve problems of actual data processing. It applies additional constraints to the development process by narrowing the scope of the smaller software components, and therebyit is hoped removing variables which could increase the likelihood of programming errors. It provides a program template, including the specification of interfaces, which can be shared by different teams of developers working on disparate parts, such that they can know in advance how each of their contributions will interface with those of the other teams. Finally, and perhaps most controversially, it specifies the program independently of the implementation language or languages, thereby removing language-specific biases and limitations which would otherwise creep into the design, perhaps unwittingly on the part of programmer-designers. Programming The history of computer programming language development can often be best understood in the light of attempts to master the complexity of computer programs, which otherwise becomes more difficult to understand in proportion (perhaps exponentially) to the size of the programs. (Another way of looking at the evolution of programming languages is simply as a way of getting the computer to do more and more of the work, but this may be a different way of saying the same thing). Lack of understanding of a program's overall structure and functionality is a sure way to fail to detect errors in the program, and thus the use of better languages should, conversely, reduce the number of errors by enabling a better understanding. Improvements in languages tend to provide incrementally what software design has attempted to do in one fell swoop: consider the software at ever greater levels of abstraction. Such inventions as statement, sub-routine, file, class, template, library, component and more have allowed the arrangement of a program's parts to be specified using abstractions such as layers, hierarchies and modules, which provide structure at different granularities, so that from any point of view the program's code can be imagined to be orderly and comprehensible.
In addition, improvements in languages have enabled more exact control over the shape and use of data elements, culminating in the abstract data type. These data types can be specified to a very fine degree, including how and when they are accessed, and even the state of the data before and after it is accessed.. Software Build and Deployment Many programming languages such as C and Java require the program "source code" to be translated in to a form that can be executed by a computer. This translation is done by a program called a compiler. Additional operations may be involved to associate, bind, link or package files together in order to create a usable runtime configuration of the software application. The totality of the compiling and assembly process is generically called "building" the software. The software build is critical to software quality because if any of the generated files are incorrect the software build is likely to fail. And, if the incorrect version of a program is inadvertently used, then testing can lead to false results. Software builds are typically done in work area unrelated to the runtime area, such as the application server. For this reason, a deployment step is needed to physically transfer the software build products to the runtime area. The deployment procedure may also involve technical parameters, which, if set incorrectly, can also prevent software testing from beginning. For example, a Java application server may have options for parent-first or parent-last class loading. Using the incorrect parameter can cause the application to fail to execute on the application server. The technical activities supporting software quality including build, deployment, change control and reporting are collectively known as Software configuration management. A number of software tools have arisen to help meet the challenges of configuration management including file control tools and build control tools. Testing Main article: Software Testing
Reg No.: 521075728
Software testing, when done correctly, can increase overall software quality of conformance by testing that the product conforms to its requirements. Testing includes, but is not limited to: Unit Testing Functional Testing Regression Testing Performance Testing Failover Testing Usability Testing
A number of agile methodologies use testing early in the development cycle to ensure quality in their products. For example, the test-driven development practice, where tests are written before the code they will test, is used in Extreme Programming to ensure quality. Runtime Runtime reliability determinations are similar to tests, but go beyond simple confirmation of behavior to the evaluation of qualities such as performance and interoperability with other code or particular hardware configurations. Software quality factors A software quality factor is a non-functional requirement for a software program which is not called up by the customer's contract, but nevertheless is a desirable requirement which enhances the quality of the software program. Note that none of these factors are binary; that is, they are not either you have it or you dont traits. Rather, they are characteristics that one seeks to maximize in ones software to optimize its quality. So rather than asking whether a software product has factor x, ask instead the degree to which it does (or does not). Some software quality factors are listed here: Understandability Clarity of purpose: This goes further than just a statement of purpose; all of the design and user documentation must be clearly written so that it is easily
understandable. This is obviously subjective in that the user context must be taken into account: for instance, if the software product is to be used by software engineers it is not required to be understandable to the layman. Completeness Presence of all constituent parts, with each part fully developed. This means that if the code calls a subroutine from an external library, the software package must provide reference to that library and all required parameters must be passed. All required input data must also be available. Conciseness Minimization of excessive or redundant information or processing. This is important where memory capacity is limited, and it is generally considered good practice to keep lines of code to a minimum. It can be improved by replacing repeated functionality by one subroutine or function which achieves that functionality. It also applies to documents. Portability Ability to be run well and easily on multiple computer configurations. Portability can mean both between different hardwaresuch as running on a PC as well as a Smartphoneand between different operating systemssuch as running on both Mac OS X and GNU/Linux. Consistency Uniformity in notation, symbology, appearance, and terminology within itself. Maintainability Propensity to facilitate updates to satisfy new requirements. Thus the software product that is maintainable should be well-documented, should not be complex, and should have spare capacity for memory, storage and processor utilization and other resources. Testability Disposition to support acceptance criteria and evaluation of performance. Such a characteristic must be built-in during the design phase if the product is to be easily testable; a complex design leads to poor testability.
Usability Convenience and practicality of use. This is affected by such things as the human-computer interface. The component of the software that has most impact on this is the user interface (UI), which for best usability is usually graphical (i.e. a GUI). Reliability Ability to be expected to perform its intended functions satisfactorily. This implies a time factor in that a reliable product is expected to perform correctly over a period of time. It also encompasses environmental considerations in that the product is required to perform correctly in whatever conditions it finds itself (sometimes termed robustness). Efficiency Fulfillment of purpose without waste of resources, such as memory, space and processor utilization, network bandwidth, time, etc. Security Ability to protect data against unauthorized access and to withstand malicious or inadvertent interference with its operations. Besides the presence of appropriate security mechanisms such as authentication, access control and encryption, security also implies resilience in the face of malicious, intelligent and adaptive attackers. Measurement of software quality factors There are varied perspectives within the field on measurement. There are a great many measures that are valued by some professionalsor in some contexts, that are decried as harmful by others. Some believe that quantitative measures of software quality are essential. Others believe that contexts where quantitative measures are useful are quite rare, and so prefer qualitative measures. Several leaders in the field of software testing have written about the difficulty of measuring what we truly want to measure well.[8][9] One example of a popular metric is the number of faults encountered in the software. Software that contains few faults is considered by some to have
Reg No.: 521075728
higher quality than software that contains many faults. Questions that can help determine the usefulness of this metric in a particular context include: a) What constitutes many faults? Does this differ depending upon the purpose of the software (e.g., blogging software vs. navigational software)? Does this take into account the size and complexity of the software? b) Does this account for the importance of the bugs (and the importance to the stakeholders of the people those bugs bug)? Does one try to weight this metric by the severity of the fault, or the incidence of users it affects? If so, how? And if not, how does one know that 100 faults discovered is better than 1000? c) If the count of faults being discovered is shrinking, how do I know what that means? For example, does that mean that the product is now higher quality than it was before? Or that this is a smaller/less ambitious change than before? Or that fewer tester-hours have gone into the project than before? Or that this project was tested by less skilled testers than before? Or that the team has discovered that fewer faults reported is in their interest? This last question points to an especially difficult one to manage. All software quality metrics are in some sense measures of human behavior, since humans create software.[8] If a team discovers that they will benefit from a drop in the number of reported bugs, there is a strong tendency for the team to start reporting fewer defects. That may mean that email begins to circumvent the bug tracking system, or that four or five bugs get lumped into one bug report, or that testers learn not to report minor annoyances. The difficulty is measuring what we mean to measure, without creating incentives for software programmers and testers to consciously or unconsciously game the measurements. Software quality factors cannot be measured because of their vague definitions. It is necessary to find measurements, or metrics, which can be used to quantify them as non-functional requirements. For example, reliability is a software quality factor, but cannot be evaluated in its own right. However, there are related attributes to reliability, which can indeed be measured. Some such
attributes are mean time to failure, rate of failure occurrence, and availability of the system. Similarly, an attribute of portability is the number of target-dependent statements in a program. A scheme that could be used for evaluating software quality factors is given below. For every characteristic, there are a set of questions which are relevant to that characteristic. Some type of scoring formula could be developed based on the answers to these questions, from which a measurement of the characteristic can be obtained. Q.3. Discuss the CMM 5 Levels for Software Process. Answer. The Software Process: In recent years, there has been a significant emphasis on process maturity. The Software Engineering Institute (SEI) has developed a comprehensive model predicated on a set of software engineering capabilities that should be present as organizations reach different levels of process maturity. To determine an organizations current state of process maturity, the SEI uses an assessment that results in a five point grading scheme. The grading scheme determines compliance with a capability maturity model (CMM) [PAU93] that defines key activities required at different levels of process maturity. The SEI approach provides a measure of the global effectiveness of a companys software engineering practices, and establishes five process maturity levels that are defined in the following manner: Level 1: Initial The Software process is characterized as ad hoc and occasionally even chaotic. Few processes are defined, and success depends on individual effort. Level 2: Repeatable Basic project management processes are established to track cost, schedule, and functionality. The necessary process discipline is in place to repeat earlier successes on projects with similar applications. Level 3: Defined The software process for both management and engineering activities is documented, standardized, and integrated into an organized-wide
software process. All projects use a documented and approved version of the organizations process for developing and supporting software. This level includes all characteristic defined for level 2. Level 4: Managed Detailed measures of the software process and product quality are collected. Both the software process and products are quantitatively understood and controlled using detailed measures. This level includes all characteristics defined for level 3. Level 5: Optimizing Continuous process improvement is enabled by quantitative feedback from the process and from testing innovative ideas and technologies. This level includes all characteristics defined for level 4. The five levels defined by the SEI were derived as a consequence of evaluating responses to the SEI assessment questionnaire that is based on the CMM. The results of the questionnaire are distilled to a single numerical grade that provides an indication of an organizations process maturity. The SEI has associated key process areas (KPAs) with each of the maturity levels. The KPAs describe those software engineering functions (e.g., software project planning, requirements management) that must be present to satisfy good practice at a particular level. Each KPA is described by identifying the following characteristics: Goals the overall objectives that the KPA must achieve. Commitments requirements (imposed on the organization) that must be met to achieve the goals, or provide proof of intent to comply with the goals. Abilities those things must be in place (organizationally and technically) to enable the organization to meet the commitments. Activities the specific tasks required to achieve the KPA function. Methods for monitoring implementation the manner in which the activities are monitored as they are put into place. Methods for verifying implementation the manner in which proper
Reg No.: 521075728
practice for the KPA can be verified. Q.4. Discuss the Water Fall Model for Software Development. Answer. The Linear Sequential Model: Sometimes called the classic life cycle or the waterfall model, the linear sequential model suggests a systematic, sequential approach to software development that begins at the system level and progresses through analysis, design, coding testing, and support. The linear sequential model for software engineering. Modeled after a conventional engineering cycle, the linear sequential model encompasses the following activities : System / information engineering and modeling because software is always part of a larger system (or business), work begins by establishing requirements for all system elements and then allocating some subset of these requirements to software. This system view is essential when software must interact with other elements such as hardware, people, and databases. System engineering and analysis encompass requirements gathering at the system level, with a small amount of top level design and analysis. Information engineering encompasses requirements gathering at the strategic business level and at the business area level. Software requirements analysis - The requirements gathering process is intensified and focused specifically on software. To understand the nature of the program(s) to be built, the software engineer (analyst) must understand the information domain for the software, as well as required function, behavior, performance, and interface. Requirements for both the system and the software are documented and reviewed with the customer. Design Software design is actually a multistep process that focuses on four distinct attributes of a program : data structure, software architecture, interface representations, and procedural (algorithmic) detail. Thedesign process translates requirements into a representation of the software that can be assessed for quality
before coding begins. Like requirements, the design is documented and becomes part of the software configuration. Code generation The design must be translated into a machine-readable form. The code generation step performs this task. If design is performed in a detailed manner, code generation can be accomplished mechanistically. Test Once the code has been generated, program testing begins. The testing process focuses on the logical internals of the software, ensuring that all statements have been tested, and on the functional externals; that is, conducting tests to uncover errors and ensure that defined input will produce actual results that agree with the required results. Support Software will undoubtedly undergo change after it is delivered to the customer (a possible exception is embedded software). Change will occur because errors have been encountered, because the software must be adapted to accommodate changes in its external environment (e.g. a change required because of a new operating system or peripheral device), or because the customer requires functional or performance enhancements. Software support / maintenance reapplies each of the preceding phases to an existing program rather than a new one. The linear sequential model is the oldest and the most widely used paradigm for software engineering. However, criticism of the paradigm has caused even active supporters to questions its efficacy [HAN95]. Among the problems that are sometimes encountered when the linear sequential model is applied are: 1. Real projects rarely follow the sequential flow that the model proposes. Although the linear model can accommodate iteration, it does so indirectly. As a result, changes can cause confusion as the project team proceeds. 2. It is often difficult for the customer to state all requirements explicitly. The linear sequential model requires this and has difficulty accommodating the natural uncertainty that exists at the beginning of many projects. 3. The customer must have patience. A working version of the program(s)
will not be available until late in the project time-span. A major blunder, if undetected until the working program is reviewed, can be disastrous.
In an interesting analysis of actual projects Bradac [BRA94], found that the linear nature of the classic life cycle leads to blocking states in which some project team members must wait for other members of the team to complete dependent tasks. In fact, the time spent waiting can exceed the time spent on productive work ! The blocking state tends to be more prevalent at the beginning and end of a linear sequential process. Each of these problems is real. However, the classic life cycle paradigm has a definite and important place in software engineering work. It provides a template into which methods for analysis, design, coding, testing, and support can be placed. The classic life cycle remains a widely used procedural model for software engineering. While it does have weaknesses, it is significantly better than a haphazard approach to software development.
Reg No.: 521075728
Q.5. Explain the Advantages of Prototype Model, & Spiral Model in Contrast to Water Fall model. Answer: Prototype Model Advantages Creating software using the prototype model also has its benefits. One of the key advantages a prototype modeled software has is the time frame of development. Instead of concentrating on documentation, more effort is placed in creating the actual software. This way, the actual software could be released in advance. The work on prototype models could also be spread to others since there are practically no stages of work in this model. Everyone has to work on the same thing and at the same time, reducing man hours in creating a software. The work will even be faster and efficient if developers will collaborate more regarding the status of a specific function and develop the necessary adjustments in time for the integration. Another advantage of having a prototype modeled software is that the software is created using lots of user feedbacks. In every prototype created, users could give their honest opinion about the software. If something is unfavorable, it can be changed. Slowly the program is created with the customer in mind. The waterfall model is a sequential design process, often used in software development processes, in which progress is seen as flowing steadily downwards
(like a waterfall) through the phases of Conception, Initiation, Analysis, Design, Construction, Testing, Production/Implementation and Maintenance.
The unmodified "waterfall model". Progress flows from the top to the bottom, like a waterfall. The waterfall development model originates in the manufacturing and construction industries: highly structured physical environments in which afterthe-fact changes are prohibitively costly, if not impossible. Since no formal software development methodologies existed at the time, this hardware-oriented model was simply adapted for software development. The first known presentation describing use of similar phases in software engineering was held by Herbert D. Benington at Symposium on advanced programming methods for digital computers on 29 June 1956.[1] This presentation was about the development of software for SAGE. In 1983 the paper was republished[2] with a foreword by Benington pointing out that the process was not in fact performed in strict top-down, but depended on a prototype. The first formal description of the waterfall model is often cited as a 1970 article by Winston W. Royce,[3] though Royce did not use the term "waterfall" in this article. Royce presented this model as an example of a flawed, non-working model (Royce 1970). This, in fact, is how the term is generally used in writing
Reg No.: 521075728
about software developmentto describe a critical view of a commonly used software practice.[4] Q.5. Explain the COCOMO Model & Software Estimation Technique. Answer: The COCOMO cost estimation model is used by thousands of software project managers, and is based on a study of hundreds of software projects. Unlike other cost estimation models, COCOMO is an open model, so all of the details are published, including:

The underlying cost estimation equations Every assumption made in the model (e.g. "the project will enjoy good management") Every definition (e.g. the precise definition of the Product Design phase of a project) The costs included in an estimate are explicitly stated (e.g. project managers are included, secretaries aren't) Because COCOMO is well defined, and because it doesn't rely upon
proprietary estimation algorithms, Costar offers these advantages to its users:
COCOMO estimates are more objective and repeatable than estimates made by methods relying on proprietary models COCOMO can be calibrated to reflect your software development environment, and to produce more accurate estimates Costar is a faithful implementation of the COCOMO model that is easy to
use on small projects, and yet powerful enough to plan and control large projects. Typically, you'll start with only a rough description of the software system that you'll be developing, and you'll use Costar to give you early estimates about the proper schedule and staffing levels. As you refine your knowledge of the
Reg No.: 521075728
problem, and as you design more of the system, you can use Costar to produce more and more refined estimates. Costar allows you to define a software structure to meet your needs. Your initial estimate might be made on the basis of a system containing 3,000 lines of code. Your second estimate might be more refined so that you now understand that your system will consist of two subsystems (and you'll have a more accurate idea about how many lines of code will be in each of the subsystems). Your next estimate will continue the process -- you can use Costar to define the components of each subsystem. Costar permits you to continue this process until you arrive at the level of detail that suits your needs. One word of warning: It is so easy to use Costar to make software cost estimates, that it's possible to misuse it -- every Costar user should spend the time to learn the underlying COCOMO assumptions and definitions from Software Engineering Economics and Software Cost Estimation with COCOMO II. Introduction to the COCOMO Model The most fundamental calculation in the COCOMO model is the use of the Effort Equation to estimate the number of Person-Months required to develop a project. Most of the other COCOMO results, including the estimates for Requirements and Maintenance, are derived from this quantity. Source Lines of Code The COCOMO calculations are based on your estimates of a project's size in Source Lines of Code (SLOC). SLOC is defined such that:
Only Source lines that are DELIVERED as part of the product are included -- test drivers and other support software is excluded SOURCE lines are created by the project staff -- code created by applications generators is excluded One SLOC is one logical line of code Declarations are counted as SLOC
Reg No.: 521075728
Comments are not counted as SLOC The original COCOMO 81 model was defined in terms of Delivered
Source Instructions, which are very similar to SLOC. The major difference between DSI and SLOC is that a single Source Line of Code may be several physical lines. For example, an "if-then-else" statement would be counted as one SLOC, but might be counted as several DSI. The Scale Drivers In the COCOMO II model, some of the most important factors contributing to a project's duration and cost are the Scale Drivers. You set each Scale Driver to describe your project; these Scale Drivers determine the exponent used in the Effort Equation. The 5 Scale Drivers are:

Precedentedness Development Flexibility Architecture / Risk Resolution Team Cohesion Process Maturity Note that the Scale Drivers have replaced the Development Mode of
COCOMO 81. The first two Scale Drivers, Precedentedness and Development Flexibility actually describe much the same influences that the original Development Mode did. Cost Drivers COCOMO II has 17 cost drivers you assess your project, development environment, and team to set each cost driver. The cost drivers are multiplicative factors that determine the effort required to complete your software project. For example, if your project will develop software that controls an airplane's flight, you would set the Required Software Reliability (RELY) cost driver to Very
Reg No.: 521075728
High. That rating corresponds to an effort multiplier of 1.26, meaning that your project will require 26% more effort than a typical software project. COCOMO II defines each of the cost drivers, and the Effort Multiplier associated with each rating. Check the Costar help for details about the definitions and how to set the cost drivers. COCOMO II Effort Equation The COCOMO II model makes its estimates of required effort (measured in Person-Months PM) based primarily on your estimate of the software project's size (as measured in thousands of SLOC, KSLOC)):
Effort = 2.94 * EAF * (KSLOC)E Where EAF Is the Effort Adjustment Factor derived from the Cost Drivers. E Is an exponent derived from the five Scale Drivers. As an example, a project with all Nominal Cost Drivers and Scale Drivers would have an EAF of 1.00 and exponent, E, of 1.0997. Assuming that the project is projected to consist of 8,000 source lines of code, COCOMO II estimates that 28.9 Person-Months of effort is required to complete it: Effort = 2.94 * (1.0) * (8)1.0997 = 28.9 Person-Months Effort Adjustment Factor The Effort Adjustment Factor in the effort equation is simply the product of the effort multipliers corresponding to each of the cost drivers for your project. For example, if your project is rated Very High for Complexity (effort multiplier of 1.34), and Low for Language & Tools Experience (effort multiplier of 1.09), and all of the other cost drivers are rated to be Nominal (effort multiplier of 1.00), the EAF is the product of 1.34 and 1.09. Effort Adjustment Factor = EAF = 1.34 * 1.09 = 1.46
Effort = 2.94 * (1.46) * (8)1.0997 = 42.3 Person-Months COCOMO II Schedule Equation The COCOMO II schedule equation predicts the number of months required to complete your software project. The duration of a project is based on the effort predicted by the effort equation: Duration = 3.67 * (Effort)SE Where Effort Is the effort from the COCOMO II effort equation SE Is the schedule equation exponent derived from the five Scale Drivers Continuing the example, and substituting the exponent of 0.3179 that is calculated from the scale drivers, yields an estimate of just over a year, and an average staffing of between 3 and 4 people: Duration = 3.67 * (42.3)0.3179 = 12.1 months Average staffing = (42.3 Person-Months) / (12.1 Months) = 3.5 people The SCED Cost Driver The COCOMO cost driver for Required Development Schedule (SCED) is unique, and requires a special explanation. The SCED cost driver is used to account for the observation that a project developed on an accelerated schedule will require more effort than a project developed on its optimum schedule. A SCED rating of Very Low corresponds to an Effort Multiplier of 1.43 (in the COCOMO II.2000 model) and means that you intend to finish your project in 75% of the optimum schedule (as determined by a previous COCOMO estimate). Continuing the example used earlier, but assuming that SCED has a rating of Very Low, COCOMO produces these estimates: Duration = 75% * 12.1 Months = 9.1 Months Effort Adjustment Factor = EAF = 1.34 * 1.09 * 1.43 = 2.09 Effort = 2.94 * (2.09) * (8)1.0997 = 60.4 Person-Months
Average staffing = (60.4 Person-Months) / (9.1 Months) = 6.7 people Notice that the calculation of duration isn't based directly on the effort (number of Person-Months) instead it's based on the schedule that would have been required for the project assuming it had been developed on the nominal schedule. Remember that the SCED cost driver means "accelerated from the nominal schedule".
Reg No.: 521075728
SOFTWARE ENGINEERING SUBJECT CODE MI0033 Assignment Set- 2

Q.1. Write a note on myths of Software. Answer: Software Myths - beliefs about software and the process used to build it - can be traced to the earliest days of computing. Myths have a number of attributes that have made them insidious. For instance, myths appear to be reasonable statements of fact, they have an intuitive feel, and they are often promulgated by experienced practitioners who "know the score". Management Myths - Managers with software responsibility, like managers in most disciplines, are often under pressure to maintain budgets, keep schedules from slipping, and improve quality. Like a drowning person who grasps at a straw, a software manager often grasps at belief in a software myth, If the Belief will lessen the pressure. Myth: We already have a book that's full of standards and procedures for building software. Won't that provide my people with everything they need to know? Reality: The book of standards may very well exist, but is it used? - Are software practitioners aware of its existence? - Does it reflect modern software engineering practice? - Is it complete? Is it adaptable? - Is it streamlined to improve time to delivery while still maintaining a focus on Quality? In many cases, the answer to these entire question is no. Myth: If we get behind schedule, we can add more programmers and catch up (sometimes called the Mongolian horde concept)
Reality: Software development is not a mechanistic process like manufacturing. In the words of Brooks [BRO75]: "Adding people to a late software project makes it later." At first, this statement may seem counterintuitive. However, as new people are added, people who were working must spend time educating the newcomers, thereby reducing the amount of time spent on productive development effort Myth: If we decide to outsource the software project to a third party, I can just relax and let that firm build it. Reality: If an organization does not understand how to manage and control software project internally, it will invariably struggle when it out sources software project. Customer Myths: A customer who requests computer software may be a person at the next desk, a technical group down the hall, the marketing /sales department, or an outside company that has requested software under contract. In many cases, the customer believes myths about software because software managers and practitioners do little to correct misinformation. Myths led to false expectations and ultimately, dissatisfaction with the developers. Myth: A general statement of objectives is sufficient to begin writing programs we can fill in details later. Reality: Although a comprehensive and stable statement of requirements is not always possible, an ambiguous statement of objectives is a recipe for disaster. Unambiguous requirements are developed only through effective and continuous communication between customer and developer. Myth: Project requirements continually change, but change can be easily accommodated because software is flexible. Reality: It's true that software requirement change, but the impact of change varies with the time at which it is introduced. When requirement changes are requested early, cost impact is relatively small. However, as time passes, cost impact grows rapidly - resources have been committed, a design framework has been established, and change can cause upheaval that requires additional resources and major design modification.
Q.2. Explain Version Control & Change Control. Answer: Change control within Quality management systems (QMS) and Information Technology (IT) systems is a formal process used to ensure that changes to a product or system are introduced in a controlled and coordinated manner. It reduces the possibility that unnecessary changes will be introduced to a system without forethought, introducing faults into the system or undoing changes made by other users of software. The goals of a change control procedure usually include minimal disruption to services, reduction in back-out activities, and costeffective utilization of resources involved in implementing change. Change control is currently used in a wide variety of products and systems. For Information Technology (IT) systems it is a major aspect of the broader discipline of change management. Typical examples from the computer and network environments are patches to software products, installation of new operating systems, upgrades to network routing tables, or changes to the electrical power systems supporting such infrastructure. Certain portions of the Information Technology Infrastructure Library cover change control. The process There is considerable overlap and confusion between change management, configuration management and change control. The definition below is not yet integrated with definitions of the others. Certain experts describe change control as a set of six step. Record / Classify Assess Plan Build / Test Implement Close / Gain Acceptance
Reg No.: 521075728
Record/classify: The client initiates change by making a formal request for something to be changed. The change control team then records and categorizes that request. This categorization would include estimates of importance, impact, and complexity. Assess: The impact assessor or assessors then make their risk analysis typically by answering a set of questions concerning risk, both to the business and to the process, and follow this by making a judgment on who should carry out the change. If the change requires more than one type of assessment, the head of the change control team will consolidate these. Everyone with a stake in the change then must meet to determine whether there is a business or technical justification for the change. The change is then sent to the delivery team for planning. Plan: Management will assign the change to a specific delivery team, usually one with the specific role of carrying out this particular type of change. The team's first job is to plan the change in detail as well as construct a regression plan in case the change needs to be backed out. Build/test: If all stakeholders agree with the plan, the delivery team will build the solution, which will then be tested. They will then seek approval and request a time and date to carry out the implementation phase. Implement: All stakeholders must agree to a time, date and cost of implementation. Following implementation, it is usual to carry out a post-implementation review which would take place at another stakeholder meeting. Close/gain acceptance: When the client agrees that the change was implemented correctly, the change can be closed. Regulatory environment: In a Good Manufacturing Practice regulated industry, the topic is frequently encountered by its users. Various industrial guidance and
commentaries are available for people to comprehend this concept. As a common practice, the activity is usually directed by one or more SOPs.[4] From the information technology perspective for clinical trials, it has been guided by another USFDA document Revision control, also known as version control or source control (and an aspect of software configuration management or SCM), is the management of changes to documents, programs, and other information stored as computer files. It is most commonly used in software development, where a team of people may change the same files. Changes are usually identified by a number or letter code, termed the "revision number", "revision level", or simply "revision". For example, an initial set of files is "revision 1". When the first change is made, the resulting set is "revision 2", and so on. Each revision is associated with a timestamp and the person making the change. Revisions can be compared, restored, and with some types of files, merged. Version control systems (VCSs singular VCS) most commonly run as standalone applications, but revision control is also embedded in various types of software such as word processors (e.g., Microsoft Word, OpenOffice.org Writer, KWord, Pages, etc.), spreadsheets (e.g., Microsoft Excel, OpenOffice.org Calc, KSpread, Numbers, etc.), and in various content management systems (e.g., Drupal, Joomla, WordPress). Integrated revision control is a key feature of wiki software packages such as MediaWiki, DokuWiki, TWiki etc. In wikis, revision control allows for the ability to revert a page to a previous revision, which is critical for allowing editors to track each other's edits, correct mistakes, and defend public wikis against vandalism and spam. Software tools for revision control are essential for the organization of multideveloper projects.[1] Source-management models Traditional revision control systems use a centralized model where all the revision control functions take place on a shared server. If two developers try to change the same file at the same time, without some method of managing access the developers may end up overwriting each other's work. Centralized revision
control systems solve this problem in one of two different "source management models": file locking and version merging. Atomic operations Computer scientists speak of atomic operations if the system is left in a consistent state even if the operation is interrupted. The commit operation is usually the most critical in this sense. Commits are operations which tell the revision control system you want to make a group of changes you have been making final and available to all users. Not all revision control systems have atomic commits; notably, the widely-used CVS lacks this feature. File locking The simplest method of preventing "concurrent access" problems involves locking files so that only one developer at a time has write access to the central "repository" copies of those files. Once one developer "checks out" a file, others can read that file, but no one else may change that file until that developer "checks in" the updated version (or cancels the checkout). File locking has both merits and drawbacks. It can provide some protection against difficult merge conflicts when a user is making radical changes to many sections of a large file (or group of files). However, if the files are left exclusively locked for too long, other developers may be tempted to bypass the revision control software and change the files locally, leading to more serious problems. Version merging Most version control systems allow multiple developers to edit the same file at the same time. The first developer to "check in" changes to the central repository always succeeds. The system may provide facilities to merge further changes into the central repository, and preserve the changes from the first developer when other developers check in. Merging two files can be a very delicate operation, and usually possible only if the data structure is simple, as in text files. The result of a merge of two image files might not result in an image file at all. The second developer checking in code will need to take care with the merge, to make sure that the changes are
compatible and that the merge operation does not introduce its own logic errors within the files. These problems limit the availability of automatic or semiautomatic merge operations mainly to simple text based documents, unless a specific merge plugin is available for the file types. The concept of a reserved edit can provide an optional means to explicitly lock a file for exclusive write access, even when a merging capability exists. Baselines, labels and tags Most revision control tools will use only one of these similar terms (baseline, label, tag) to refer to the action of identifying a snapshot ("label the project") or the record of the snapshot ("try it with baseline X"). Typically only one of the terms baseline, label, or tag is used in documentation or discussion they can be considered synonyms. In most projects some snapshots are more significant than others, such as those used to indicate published releases, branches, or milestones. When both the term baseline and either of label or tag are used together in the same context, label and tag usually refer to the mechanism within the tool of identifying or making the record of the snapshot, and baseline indicates the increased significance of any given label or tag. Most formal discussion of configuration management uses the term baseline. Distributed revision control Distributed revision control (DRCS) takes a peer-to-peer approach, as opposed to the client-server approach of centralized systems. Rather than a single, central repository on which clients synchronize, each peer's working copy of the codebase is a bona-fide repository.[2] Distributed revision control conducts synchronization by exchanging patches (change-sets) from peer to peer. This results in some important differences from a centralized system:
No canonical, reference copy of the codebase exists by default; only working copies.
Reg No.: 521075728
Common operations (such as commits, viewing history, and reverting changes) are fast, because there is no need to communicate with a central server.
Rather, communication is only necessary when pushing or pulling changes to or from other peers.
Each working copy effectively functions as a remote backup of the code base and of its change-history, providing natural protection against data loss.
Integration Some of the more advanced revision-control tools offer many other facilities, allowing deeper integration with other tools and software-engineering processes. Plugins are often available for IDEs such as Oracle JDeveloper, IntelliJ IDEA, Eclipse and Visual Studio. NetBeans IDE and Xcode come with integrated version control support. Common vocabulary Terminology can vary from system to system, but some terms in common usage include Baseline: An approved revision of a document or source file from which subsequent changes can be made. See baselines, labels and tags. Branch: A set of files under version control may be branched or forked at a point in time so that, from that time forward, two copies of those files may develop at different speeds or in different ways independently of each other. Change: A change (or diff, or delta) represents a specific modification to a document under version control. The granularity of the modification considered a change varies between version control systems. Change list:
On many version control systems with atomic multi-change commits, a changelist, change set, or patch identifies the set of changes made in a single commit. This can also represent a sequential view of the source code, allowing the examination of source "as of" any particular changelist ID. Checkout: A check-out (or co) is the act of creating a local working copy from the repository. A user may specify a specific revision or obtain the latest. The term 'checkout' can also be used as a noun to describe the working copy. Commit: A commit (checkin, ci or, more rarely, install, submit or record) is the action of writing or merging the changes made in the working copy back to the repository. The terms 'commit' and 'checkin' can also be used in noun form to describe the new revision that is created as a result of committing. Conflict: A conflict occurs when different parties make changes to the same document, and the system is unable to reconcile the changes. A user must resolve the conflict by combining the changes, or by selecting one change in favour of the other. Delta compression: Most revision control software uses delta compression, which retains only the differences between successive versions of files. This allows for more efficient storage of many different versions of files. Dynamic stream: A stream in which some or all file versions are mirrors of the parent stream's versions. Export: Exporting is the act of obtaining the files from the repository. It is similar to checking-out except that it creates a clean directory tree without the versioncontrol metadata used in a working copy. This is often used prior to publishing the contents, for example. Head:
Also sometime called tip, this refers to the most recent commit. Import: Importing is the act of copying a local directory tree (that is not currently a working copy) into the repository for the first time. Mainline: Similar to trunk, but there can be a mainline for each branch. Merge: A merge or integration is an operation in which two sets of changes are applied to a file or set of files. Some sample scenarios are as follows: A user, working on a set of files, updates or syncs their working copy with changes made, and checked into the repository, by other users. A user tries to check-in files that have been updated by others since the files were checked out, and the revision control software automatically merges the files (typically, after prompting the user if it should proceed with the automatic merge, and in some cases only doing so if the merge can be clearly and reasonably resolved). A set of files is branched, a problem that existed before the branching is fixed in one branch, and the fix is then merged into the other branch. A branch is created, the code in the files is independently edited, and the updated branch is later incorporated into a single, unified trunk. Promote: The act of copying file content from a less controlled location into a more controlled location. For example, from a user's workspace into a repository, or from a stream to its parent.[7] Repository: The repository is where files' current and historical data are stored, often on a server. Sometimes also called a depot (for example, by SVK, AccuRev and Perforce). Resolve: The act of user intervention to address a conflict between different changes to the same document.
Reverse integration: The process of merging different team branches into the main trunk of the versioning system. Revision: Also version: A version is any change in form. In SVK, a Revision is the state at a point in time of the entire tree in the repository. Share: The act of making one file or folder available in multiple branches at the same time. When a shared file is changed in one branch, it is changed in other branches. Stream: A container for branched files that has a known relationship to other such containers. Streams form a hierarchy; each stream can inherit various properties (like versions, namespace, workflow rules, subscribers, etc.) from its parent stream. Tag: A tag or label refers to an important snapshot in time, consistent across many files. These files at that point may all be tagged with a user-friendly, meaningful name or revision number. See baselines, labels and tags. Trunk: The unique line of development that is not a branch (sometimes also called Baseline or Mainline) Update: An update (or sync) merges changes made in the repository (by other people, for example) into the local working copy. Working copy: The working copy is the local copy of files from a repository, at a specific time or revision. All work done to the files in a repository is initially done on a working copy, hence the name.
Reg No.: 521075728
Q.3. Discuss the SCM Process. Answer: Traditional Software Configuration Management Process Traditional SCM process is looked upon as the best fit solution to handling changes in software projects. Traditional SCM process identifies the functional and physical attributes of a software at various points in time and performs systematic control of changes to the identified attributes for the purpose of maintaining software integrity and traceability throughout the software development life cycle. The SCM process further defines the need to trace the changes and the ability to verify that the final delivered software has all the planned enhancements that are supposed to be part of the release. The traditional SCM identifies four procedures that must be defined for each software project to ensure a good SCM process is implemented. They are Configuration Identification Configuration Control Configuration Status Accounting Configuration Authentication Most of this section will cover traditional SCM theory. Do not consider this as boring subject since this section defines and explains the terms that will be used throughout this document. 3.1. Configuration Identification Software is usually made up of several programs. Each program, its related documentation and data can be called as a "configurable item"(CI). The number of CI in any software project and the grouping of artifacts that make up a CI is a decision made of the project. The end product is made up of a bunch of CIs. The status of the CIs at a given point in time is called as a baseline. The baseline serves as a reference point in the software development life cycle. Each
Reg No.: 521075728
new baseline is the sum total of an older baseline plus a series of approved changes made on the CI A baseline is considered to have the following attributes 1. Functionally complete A baseline will have a defined functionality. The features and functions of this particular baseline will be documented and available for reference. Thus the capabilities of the software at a particular baseline is well known. 2. Known Quality The quality of a baseline will be well defined. i.e. all known bugs will be documented and the software will have undergone a complete round of testing before being put define as the baseline. 3. Immutable and completely recreatable A baseline, once defined, cannot be changed. The list of the CIs and their versions are set in stone. Also, all the CIs will be under version control so the baseline can be recreated at any point in time. 3.2. Configuration Control The process of deciding, co-ordinating the approved changes for the proposed CIs and implementing the changes on the appropriate baseline is called Configuration control. It should be kept in mind that configuration control only addresses the process after changes are approved. The act of evaluating and approving changes to software comes under the purview of an entirely different process called change control. 3.3. Configuration Status Accounting Configuration status accounting is the bookkeeping process of each release. This procedure involves tracking what is in each version of software and the changes that lead to this version.
Reg No.: 521075728
Configuration status accounting keeps a record of all the changes made to the previous baseline to reach the new baseline. 3.4. Configuration Authentication Configuration authentication (CA) is the process of assuring that the new baseline has all the planned and approved changes incorporated. The process involves verifying that all the functional aspects of the software is complete and also the completeness of the delivery in terms of the right programs, documentation and data are being delivered. The configuration authentication is an audit performed on the delivery before it is opened to the entire world. 3.5. Tools that aid Software Configuration Management Free Software Tools TODO: need some writeup here on each tool. Free software tools that help in SCM are Concurrent Versions System (CVS) Revision Control System (RCS) Source Code Control System (SCCS) Rational ClearCase PVCS Microsoft Visual SourceSafe
Commercial Tools
3.6. SCM and SEI Capability Maturity Model The Capability Maturity Model defined by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) for Software describes the principles and practices to achieve a certain level of software process maturity. The model is intended to help software organizations improve the maturity of their software processes in terms of an evolutionary path from ad hoc, chaotic processes to mature, disciplined software processes. The CMM is designed towards organizations in improving their software processes for building better software faster and at a lower cost.
Reg No.: 521075728
The Software Engineering Institute (SEI) defines five levels of maturity of a software development process. They are denoted pictorially below.
Associated with each level from level two onwards are key areas which an organization is required to focus on to move on to the next level. Such focus areas are called as Key Process Areas (KPA) in CMM parlance. As part of level 2 maturity, one of the KPAs that has been identified is SCM. Q.4. Explain Answer: I. Software doesnt Wear Out. Answer: In 1970, less than 1% of the public could have intelligently described what "computer software" meant. Today, most personal and many members of the public at large feel that they understand software. But do they? A text book description of software might take the following form: Software is (1) Instructions (computer programs) that when executed provide desired function and performance,
(2) Data structures that enable the programs to adequately manipulate information, and (3) documents that describe the operation and use of the programs. There is no question that other, more complete definitions could be offered. But we need more than a formal definition. Software Characteristics to gain an understanding of software, it is important to examine the characteristics of software that make it different from other things that human beings build. When hardware is built, the human creative process (analysis, design, construction, testing) is ultimately translated into a physical form. If we build a new computer, our initial sketches, formal design drawings, and bread boarded prototype evolve into a physical product (chips, circuit boards, power supplies, etc). Software is a logically rather than a physical system element. Therefore, software has characteristics that are considerably different than those of hardware:
1.
Software is developed or engineered, it is not manufactured in the classical sense.
Although some similarities exist between software development and hardware manufacture, the two activities are fundamentally different. In both activities, high quality is achieved through good design, but the manufacturing phase for hardware can introduce quality problems that are nonexistent (or easily corrected) for software. Both activities are dependent on the people, but the relationship between people applied and work accomplished is entirely different. Both activities require the construction of a "product" but the approaches are different. Software costs are concentrated in engineering. This means that software projects can not be managed as if they were manufacturing projects. 2. Software doesn't "wear out." Bath tub curve
Reg No.: 521075728
Figure above depicts failure rate as a function of time for hardware. The relationship often called the "bath tub curve" indicates that hardware exhibits relatively high failure rates early in its life (these failures are often attributable to design or manufacturing defects); defects are corrected and the failure rate drops to a steady-state level (ideally, quite low) for some period of time. As time passes, however, the failure rate rises again as hardware components suffer from the cumulative effects of dust, vibration, abuse, temperature extremes, and any other environmental maladies. Stated simply, the hardware begins to wear out. Software is not suspect able to the environmental maladies that cause hardware to wear out. In, theory, therefore, the failure rate curve for the software should take the form of the "idealized curve". Undiscovered defects will cause high failure early in the life of a program. However these are corrected (ideally, without introducing other errors) and the curve flattens. However, the implication is clear--software doesn't wear out. But it does deteriorate! Idealized curve
Reg No.: 521075728
3. Although the industry is moving towards component-based assembly, most software continues to be custom built. Consider the manner in which the control hardware for a computer-based product is designed and built. The design engineer draws a simple schematic of the digital circuitry, does some fundamental analyst to assure that proper function will be achieved, and then goes to the shelf where catalogs of digital components exist. Each integrated circuit (called an IC or a chip) has a part number, a defined and validated function, a well-defined interface, and a standard set of integration guidelines. After each component is selected, it can be ordered off the shelf. As an engineering discipline evolves, a collection of standard design components is created. Standard screws andoff-the-shelfintegrated circuits are only electrical engineers as they design new system. The reusable components have created so that the engineer can concentrate on the truly innovative elements of a design, that is, the parts of the design that represents something new. In the hardware world, component reuse is a natural part of the engineering process. In the software world, It is something that has only begun to be achieved on a broad scale. ii. Software is engineered & not manufactured. Answer: The roadmap to building high quality software products is software process. Software processes are adapted to meet the needs of software engineers and managers as they undertake the development of a software product. A software process provides a framework for managing activities that can very easily get out of control. Different projects require different software processes. The software engineer's work products (programs, documentation, data) are produced as consequences of the activities defined by the software process.
The best indicators of how well a software process has worked are the quality, timeliness, and long-term viability of the resulting software product.
Software Engineering Software engineering encompasses a process, management techniques, technical methods, and the use of tools. Generic Software Engineering Phases Definition phase - focuses on what (information engineering, software project planning, and requirements analysis). Development phase - focuses on how (software design, code generation, software testing). Support phase - focuses on change (corrective maintenance, adaptive maintenance, perfective maintenance, preventative maintenance). Software Engineering Activities Software project tracking and control Formal technical reviews Software quality assurance Software configuration management Document preparation and production Reusability management Measurement Risk management
Q.5. Explain the Different types of Software Measurement Techniques Answer: Software Measurement Techniques: Measurements in the physical world can be categorized in two ways : direct measures (e.g. the length of a bolt) and indirect measures (e.g. the quality
of bolts produced, measured by counting rejects). Software metrics can be categorized similarly. Direct measures of the software engineering process include cost and effort applied. Direct measures of the product include lines of code (LOC) produced, execution speed, memory size, and defects reported over some set period of time. Indirect measures of the product include functionality, quality, complexity, efficiency, reliability, maintainability, and many other abilities. 1. Size Oriented Metrics: Size-oriented software metrics are derived by normalizing quality and / or productivity measures by considering the size of the software that has been produced. If a software organization maintains simple records, a table of sizeoriented measures can be created. The table lists each software development project that has been completed over the past few years and corresponding measures for that project. 12,100 lines of code were developed with 24 personmonths of effort at a cost $168,000. It should be noted that the effort and cost recorded in the table represent all software engineering activities (analysis, design, code, and test), not just coding. Further information for project alpha indicates that 365 pages of documentation were developed, 134 errors were recorded before the software was released, and 29 defects were encountered after release to the customer within the first year of operation. Three people worked on the development of software for project alpha. 2. Function Oriented Metrics: Function-oriented software metrics use a measure of the functionality delivered by the application as a normalization value. Since functionality cannot be measured directly, it must be derived indirectly using other direct measures. Function-oriented metrics were first proposed by Albrecht [ALB79], who suggested a measure called the function point. Function points are derived using an empirical relationship based on countable (direct) measures of softwares information domain and assessments of software complexity. 3. Extended Function Point Metrics:
The function point measure was originally designed to be applied to business information systems applications. To accommodate these applications, the data dimension (the information domain values discussed previously) was emphasized to the exclusion of the functional and behavioral (control) dimensions. For this reason, the function point measure was inadequate for many engineering and embedded systems (which emphasize function and control). A number of extensions to the basic function point measure have been proposed to remedy this situation. Q.6. Write a Note on Spiral Model. Answer: The spiral model is a software development process combining elements of both design and prototyping-in-stages, in an effort to combine advantages of top-down and bottom-up concepts. Also known as the spiral lifecycle model (or spiral development), it is a systems development method (SDM) used in information technology (IT). This model of development combines the features of the prototyping model and the waterfall model. The spiral model is intended for large, expensive and complicated projects. This should not be confused with the Helical model of modern systems architecture that uses a dynamic programming (mathematical not software type programming!) approach in order to optimise the system's architecture before design decisions are made by coders that would cause problems. The spiral model was defined by Barry Boehm in his 1986 article "A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement".[1] This model was not the first model to discuss iterative development. As originally envisioned, the iterations were typically 6 months to 2 years long. Each phase starts with a design goal and ends with the client (who may be internal) reviewing the progress thus far. Analysis and engineering efforts are applied at each phase of the project, with an eye toward the end goal of the project
Reg No.: 521075728
Reg No.: 521075728

MI0033 SET-1 &amp SET-2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MI0033 SET-1 &amp SET-2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING SUBJECT CODE MI0033 Assignment Set- 1

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

proprietary estimation algorithms, Costar offers these advantages to its users:

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING SUBJECT CODE MI0033 Assignment Set- 2

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Software is developed or engineered, it is not manufactured in the classical sense.

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY

Reg No.: 521075728

SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY