Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Report Generation and Verification for HFSM structure #51

Open
AWatk opened this issue Sep 21, 2017 · 2 comments
Open

Report Generation and Verification for HFSM structure #51

AWatk opened this issue Sep 21, 2017 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@AWatk
Copy link
Collaborator

AWatk commented Sep 21, 2017

Generate a report/test procedure for the user to fill out that checks that key assumptions and conventions are properly implemented. Relevant from a systems engineering standpoint for software verification.

Relevant areas to check:

  1. Event Spawning
  2. Initialization
  3. Documentation
  4. Timer Periods

Example Process concerning event spawning:

  • Generate Code
  • Spawn event requires pragma to say whether it has been checked or not
  • Compilation creates report of all areas that have no been checked
  • Report contains task list and steps for code verification

Example task list for event spawning:

  • When should this event be spawned while in this state?
  • Do the current conditionals for event spawning in this state properly meet the intended criterion for event spawning?
  • Are there any child states that will change how this event is spawned or handled?
  • If so, will this event still be spawned and handled properly?
@finger563 finger563 added this to the 1.2.0 milestone Oct 24, 2017
@finger563
Copy link
Owner

look into automatically generating test runs and reports using: https://github.com/catchorg/Catch2

@finger563 finger563 modified the milestones: 1.2.0, 1.3.0 Dec 28, 2017
@finger563
Copy link
Owner

Should generate matrix of all states and all events showing which events are not handled in which states. Should include form for signing off that this is indeed correct behavior.

Perhaps we can do this from within the modeling environment as a separate viz and store the signoff in the model?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants