I have the following Questions About embedded unit testing:
Can Google unit testing be used for embedded C Code?
Is Google unit test compatible with IEC 62304?
I tried to find a document, which could answer my Question but unable to find that. Even in the Google Unit Test Official Documentation1, I was not able to find the answer. Also, I have the following Question:
How would I know an open source Unit Testing Tool is compatible with IEC 62304 Standard?
Please help me with your Knowledge in Unit Testing.
Thanks in Advance.
To answer your questions directly:
googletest is intended for use with C++. The link in Vertexwahn’s answer shows that at least one person has been able to use it for testing C.
2 & 3. IEC 62304 is a software life cycle process, it has nothing to say about whether you can or cannot use a particular tool, only the steps which you must go through in your project.
Unit testing is certainly one step that you would go through in your software life cycle. As the engineer responsible, it is your job to decide whether or not a tool is suitable for a particular task. No person outside your project can ever tell you that a tool is suitable for use in developing a particular medical device, because this depends very highly not only on the design of the particular device, but also on the testing strategy that your are going to adopt.
The testing strategy in turn will depend on the particular risks that you need to mitigate. You will need to follow ISO 14971 for your risk management process.
At every stage of the process you will have to document the reasons for the decisions that you have made according to an ISO 13485 quality management process.
When you come to make a regulatory submission to an approved body they will appoint an auditor who will look through your documentation. In the vast majority of cases the auditor will have absolutely no technical expertise in software. They will check that you have followed the appropriate documentation process but ultimately they will take your word on whether or not a tool is suitable.
It is easy to trick an auditor and use an unsuitable tool by creating a large volume of paperwork which falsely explains why it is suitable. If you do this no one will know until or unless the medical device causes harm to someone and your company (or you personally) gets sued or prosecuted and the documents get examined by technical experts appointed by a court.
What you need to think about when you put your signature on the document that states the tool is suitable is whether you could stand up in court and defend your decision after someone has been harmed.
After all this, having said that no tool is ever either inherently suitable or unsuitable, there are some software suppliers that make claims of suitability or even "pre-approval". What this means is that they have pre-written many of the documents that your regulatory submission will require. These are always very expensive (nothing free like googletest fits into this category). Even if you use these pre-written documents, it is your responsibility to review them and put your signature against them and say that they are correct and more importantly that they are applicable to your specific project. Buying a product like this saves you time, but not liability.
GoogleTest seems to work with C -> https://meekrosoft.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/unit-testing-c-code-with-the-googletest-framework/
Google will not take over the responsibility for you to be compliant with IEC 62304 regarding your use cases. You have to make sure that the tools you use do what they should do for the use case you use them. For instance, you can come up with an acceptance test for GoogleTest that proves that it works for you as expected.
When doing this consider also known bugs. Even if a company offers you a unit test framework that is IEC 62304 compliant I would ask myself if this test framework has more users and is better tested than gtest.
I think something like this does not exist - it would mean that the Open Source project would take over the liability for damages resulting from its users
Related
I see the term "pure upstream" used a lot describing different software packages/distributions. I get that "upstream" in the context of open source refers to a code base from which a certain software package was forked. But what does it mean to say that a certain software package is "pure upstream"?
I think the “pure” part of "pure upstream" means that the codebase remains unencumbered with changes that are custom changes needed for a particular application use or environment which isn’t applicable to most users. Some projects may want to evolve to become more of a Swiss army knife of an application but some may decide to keep to a small coherent functional space. How purity rules apply is a judgement call for the maintainers of the upstream project.
An example of a non-pure fork could be a proprietary extension that could cause vendor lock-in. Take a look at this article about Kubernetes: https://technative.io/kubernetes-must-stay-pure-upstream-open-source/
I'm having some doubts about which system should I use for a new software.
No code has been written yet, I'm just breaking apart all the needs and only then start coding.
This will be implemented in a computer company that provides services for other companies, onsite and remotely.
These are my variables:
Number of technicians
Location of customer
Type of problem
Services already scheduled for the technician
Expertise of the technician about the situation
Customer priority
Maybe some are missing, but these are the most important ones.
This job is being done manually, and has humans, we fail to see the best route to be taken sometimes.
Let's say that a customer calls with a printer problem.
First, check which tech knows about printers.
Then, is the tech available? far from the customer? can it be done remotely (software issues)?
Can it be done by another tech who is closer from the customer location?
Does this customer have more priority than the other where the same tech should be going?
Is the technician schedule full? If yes, pass to another printer/hardware tech.
I know my english is not perfect (not my natural language), but I'll try to provide more details or correct the text as needed.
So, my question is this, what kind of approach would you take? Genetic algorithm seems nice for this kind of job, and I also have some experience with GAF and WatchMaker (Java GA Framework). However, when reading the text above, an expert system seems also appropriate.
Have someone done something like this?!I had search for this kind of software and couldn't find anything alike.
Would another approach be better than the two asked?!
Also, I'm building up a table with all the techs capabilities and expertise, with simple rules like, 1 to 5 about each expertise. This is also a decision factor.
Thanks.
Why not do both? Use an expert system (a rule engine) to define your constraints and use a metaheuristic (such as Local Search or Genetic Algorithms) to solve it. The planning engine OptaPlanner (java, open source) does exactly that (by using the rule engine Drools). The architecture look likes this:
Here's a video demonstrating the constraint flexibility on the vehicle routing problem (VRP). Your problem seems to be an advanced variant on VRP (which is a variant on TSP).
Maybe you can start off with TSP,
here http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_salesman_problem
I guess it only deals with the distance.
I want to build a free app to become familiar with what is required, but I was always confused about the steps one needs to take to START a software project.
What are the steps required in order to develop a mobile app?
I will list some of the things I think should be done but I don't necessarily know how to do. Any advice, details and technologies you have to accomplish these steps would be awesome.
Decide which platform you want to develop. What are some of the pros and cons in this area for android vs iOS vs Windows8?
How to test the app - can you get free hardware to test with a well detailed app plan? Emulator?
Detail what you want the app to do and which functionalities you want.
Research if this app already exists. What are some areas of concerns in terms of not breaking the law such as patent infringement etc?
Setup a source repository such as git (google a guide I guess?)
Look at guides to familiarize yourself with APIs and write sample code to learn what you need?
Start the development and keep doing the above as needed.
Starting a software project can be as easy as start writing code. Most programmers will have an intuition as to what needs to be done and how it could be done. The other extreme of starting a software project is to start with talking to a client (or looking at the world) and figuring out what the problem is. I find that a thorough understanding of the problem you are trying to address with a project is already a long way into getting the project done painlessly. It'll give you a good understanding of what is required for you to call your project done.
So I guess point number one becomes: know what the problem is you're solving. Knowing this will also tell you if any existing app solves the same problem to a satisfying standard.
NOTE: I am not that familiar with the Windows 8 platform so my answer mostly talks about iOS and Android. The issues raised however are broad enough to cover large parts of the Windows platform.
Platform
Selecting a deployment platform is an important part of a launching a product, and a lot of other decisions depend on the platform. We are in the unfortunate state that two major mobile OSes exist that are separate in terms of code development and reuse. When considering selecting your deployment platform you'll want to think about the audience, and the (potential) sub set of the audience that is willing to pay for your application. Android might have to most devices out there but iPhone makes the most money (also for developers). However, remember that there are lots of apps out there and most developers don't ever make any (or not enough) money out of their apps.
Getting into app development with the aim of getting rich is going to leave you dissappointed. That's not very likely, then again someone always wins the lottery as well. It is a good way though to get employed and make some money that way.
Then there is the question of programming language (Java, Objective-C or C#). This is largely decided on what you are already familiar with, and if you aren't then refer back to the previous point.
Testing
Testing the product is a tricky thing. You'll have to start off with the emulator (which is usually provided with the development pack). Sooner or later however you'll have to test the app on hardware. I doubt you'll get your hands on free hardware but borrowing from friends and relatives is always an option. There may also be businesses that rent out test hardware to developers, if there isn't then I suppose that's one business idea to work on.
The platform choice will affect this also. Android is running on a much wider range of hardware than iOS.
Patent infringment
I don't know that much about patent issues, other than software patents are nasty. As a single developer I wouldn't be too worried about infringing on patents, the main purpose of them is to keep competitors at bay. What usually ends up happening is that big companies kill off competition with patent lawsuits, or they buy a smaller company that holds a nice collection of patents.
If you want to be on the safe side (meaning you own a company and are really doing this to make money) then talk to patent lawyers.
Code repository
A code hosting service like GitHub is fantastic in that it not only provides a place to have you code, but it also provides issue trackers for keeping notes on the functionality that is still missing or bugs that have crept up in your software.
The best places to start learning about Git are git-scm.com and the GitHub help pages.
Software development plan
Your last point explodes to a thing called software engineering. There has been lots of research into different ways of managing software development projects. The idea being that software development tends to be extended over long periods of time, the requirements of the project change during the project (as you learn more) and the project can involve anything from 1 to 100s of developers. Some way coordinating work between those developers (and all other parties involved like customers) has to be formalised, enter software engineering. The aim is to define a methodology and project structure that guides the development process and makes it more likely that the requirements are met at the end of the project.
Some models worth looking into include (Test Driven Development and other agile methods).
Finally I would add to the list of things that need to be done
Research libraries, note that this comes before familiarising yourself with the APIs of those libraries.
What software already exists that does a part of what you want to achieve. This goes partly back to the question of what platform to use. Apple has put a lot of attention in developing easy to use frameworks to support iOS app development. I am not that familiar with Andoird's or Windows 8 but the less code you have to write the faster the product will be done.
1 http://mobiledevices.about.com/od/kindattentiondevelopers/tp/Android-Os-Vs-Apple-Ios-Which-Is-Better-For-Developers.htm
There is only one step needed: Just start that project!
You are going to develop a free application, so it should be fun to do that. Choose whatever you like and keep going:
Make sure you are productive enough -- 10 Laws of Productivity
Avoid complexity -- Occam's razor, KISS principle
Let CI system do the boring stuff -- Machines should work; people should think.
Read books and improve yourself.
Please also avoid blind decisions. If you simply try several available options you'll eventually find the best way to achieve your goals. Do some PoC and decide. Nowadays 1-2 hours should be enough to start with any technology. This is the rule of maturity. You have your own goals, so it is better to avoid immature solutions.
Happy coding.
CPlayer I came to this forum with the same question since I am new to mobile app design and want to make my own app. I realize it is important to take certain steps in the correct order so that wasted time is minimized or eliminated. I did some research and came across two online sources I believe, if they are put together as one, will make one better source. The links are:
http://answers.oreilly.com/topic/2311-a-mobile-app-development-checklist/
http://mobiledevices.about.com/od/kindattentiondevelopers/ht/How-To-Create-An-App-For-The-Iphone.htm
Good Luck,
laroice
I have a small course project that would best have a user-friendly front end.
It's a network sniffer, I coded the program with C and Linux. And now I am hoping to make it more ``user-friendly".
In c: Getopt
In c++, if relevant: Boost program options
Try to behave like other programs (at the very least provide a useful --help message, and print some sort of simple usage description for invalid arguments). I find the easiest way to understand how to use a program is when its manual page, or even --help message gives examples of common usage cases.
If by user friendly you mean you want to make a gui for it then I would definitely recommend GTK. GTK is one of the more widely use Xserver tool kits and it is written in C. Another plus is that it is written in an object oriented manner. IMO being exposed to how OO programming is accomplished in C is a great thing for all CS students.
If your sniffer has a command line front end, have a look at Eric S. Raymond's The of Unix Programming. In chapter 10, there's a whole section on how to name and format your command line arguments. There's also a POSIX standard for utility syntax.
These approaches won't directly make your program user friendly, only research on your users and analysis of your interfaces will help with this. However, providing an interface that works in ways that users expect will certainly help.
Im no expert in UI Design, or anything in that matter, but taking an interest in the quality of User Interface Design, I came across Aza Raskin, an interface design expert that is head of design for Mozilla Labs. I have followed some lectures and conventions that Aza has done on UI Design, and he said something that is simple, yet makes more sense then anything I have ever learned with UI Design...I may butcher it but its along the lines of
If The User has to think about the design,then it is a bad design
This may seem like an insult to everybody's intelligence, but it makes sense. Something that is user friendly cant be ambiguous to the user. This means that when a user is performing some task/operation, the UI should be presented to them corresponding to the current event or situation.
The UI should be designed so that anybody who picks up your software should be able to navigate through it. This DOESNT mean that they should understand the underlying problem domain, but it does mean that if asked to find a certain functional part of the software, that they could generally navigate themselves there.
Some things to things to think about when using your software:
1) -Do you ever ask yourself, "Do I go here or here?
2) -Do I use tools like bold fonts and italicizing to show emphasis?
3) -Am I sacrificing anything by making certain features "idiot proof"(Read Below)
4) -Am I trying to do too much anywhere just to save time(programming time)
These are just some things that can help straighten out some of your design decisions. In no way is this following any pattern. Like I said, my education in this field is minimal, it is just an interest I have followed.
Regarding #3, It is important that you don't sacrifice any feature or design decision when implementing certain accommodations. If you have something where 99% of your users are using a certain feature, but 1% can be expected to make a different decision, then take this into consideration. Don't sacrifice the design for the 99% of the users to accommodate the other 1%. This doesn't mean don't accommodate the other users, I just mean don't sacrifice the integrity of the design.
If you don't need to interact with the app "live" or only need limited interaction as a command line app then you can write a frontend using PyGTK. If you need to access C libraries then you can use Cython to load and call them.
But regardless of what you choose, be sure to find a professional interface designer. A bad interface can destroy the potential popularity of any app.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I've started to write a file format specification for a domain-specific data type. My goal is to improve interoperability between a large number of data providers and search algorithms. I want the result to be available for use, patent-free and without distribution fees.
I'm looking for advice on which license to use, both for the specification and for the contributor agreement, if I need one.
If this were software then I know enough about the GPL, MIT, etc. licenses to make an informed decision. If this were a straight document then I would pick one of the Creative Commons licenses, likely CC by attribution.
Looking around, I don't find any common license statement or much in the way of advice. I'm leaning towards the one used in RFC (for example, the HTTP/1.1 copyright statement) but that says "this document itself may not be modified in any way" (with exceptions), which is something I'm not used to from developing code under the MIT and GPL licenses. But that restrictions seems pretty common in specifications.
Unlike most documents but like code, specifications can be affected by patent. Is it best practices these days to also state that the specification is patent-free and require any contributors to reveal any patent conflicts they may know of and/or freely license those patents for the purposes of implementing the spec?
Should I require some sort of contributor agreement?
Or should I just wing it, choose the RFC copyright statement (or CC-By-Attribution), and not worry about this?
"this document itself may not be modified in any way" (with exceptions) [...] But that restrictions seems pretty common in specifications.
Actually, it is pretty much a requirement. If anybody could change it at will, it wouldn't be much of a specification: that would defeat the whole purpose to "improve interoperability between a large number of data providers and search algorithms".
Dalke: Is it? I'm so used to implementation-defined and ad hoc format definitions and people who break the spec left and right that I didn't think it would add anything, and protection would hinder future extension if I decide to not continue maintaining the code. I thought conformance was better handled by trademark law, like how DRM-based CDs which violate Phillips' Red Book can't use the "CD" logo.
[...] which is something I'm not used to from developing code under the MIT and GPL licenses
Actually, you are used to it, you just don't realize it: the whole reason why you were able to just write the three letters "GPL" above and blindly assume that everybody knows precisely what you mean, is because the GPL itself contains exactly that same restriction. ("Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.") The GPL itself is not distributed under a Free License, precisely because if anybody where allowed to modify it, it would lose its meaning.
Dalke: You're right, although the GFDL's "invariant section" sprang immediately to mind when I was considering the possibilities. I will point out that people do things in the license grant which modify the terms of the GPL to, among other things, make it non-free, and I've personally modified the three-clause BSD license to scratch out Berkeley and put in my name, but those are quibbles.
Is it best practices these days to also state that the specification is patent-free and require any contributors to reveal any patent conflicts they may know of and/or freely license those patents for the purposes of implementing the spec?
Yes. It is clear from your question that you care a great deal about making the barrier for implementors as low as possible. Then, what good is a free, open, royalty-free specification if I have to pay for a patent license anyway? This has to be addressed, preferably by an IP/patent lawyer with extensive expertise in such questions (including, but not limited to, the specific challenges that open source projects face with regards to patent licensing).
There are some quite subtle pitfalls in there. For example, one common theme is to require that patent licenses be made available under what is usually called FRAND (or RAND) terms, which stands for fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. Which sounds good, right? Except there's a subtle problem there: charging 1 cent for every copy is certainly reasonable and if you charge everybody the same amount, it's also fair and non-discriminatory. Except that open source projects (and even freely distributable proprietary ones) cannot enforce those terms, therefore they cannot implement the specification.
Dalke: Very true. But for licenses that's a well described topic. There are reams of text on the matter, and suggestions, and podcasts, and even automated license choosers. For specifications, not so much. I did know about the RAND issue, and I've heard stories about other spec where a contributor at the end said "Oh! Look at that! We've got a patent on it. Well lucky us!" A question is how much I should worry about it.
So, proper patent promises or covenants or whatever you call them, are very important. (As are trademarks, by the way.)
For example, the W3C originally wanted to adopt a RAND license for its specifications, but after significant protests from projects such as Mozilla and Apache, they decided upon a royalty-free model. So, even an organization which cares deeply about freedom and openness almost made a mistake with the potential of killing every single open source web browser, feedreader and XML parser.
Or should I just wing it, choose the RFC copyright statement (or CC-By-Attribution), and not worry about this?
"Winging" important legal decisions is how people end up bankrupt or even in jail. Or at least extremely unhappy. While the first two are pretty unlikely in this case, I assume that you will be unhappy if you find out in two years that your specification is completely useless because of a glitch in its patent/copyright/IP legalese.
Dalke: I knew that word would be a draw. ;)
There are legal firms that specialize in pro bono work for non-profit developers of open source projects; maybe one of those will help you. The most well-known ones are probably the Software Freedom Law Center (SLFC) in the US and the Institut für Rechtsfragen der Freien und Open Source Software (ifrOSS) in Germany.
And whaddaya know, the fourth news item on the ifrOSS homepage is about the Open Web Foundation Agreement, which is a license template by the Open Web Foundation specifically for open, non-proprietary community-driven specifications for web technologies.
Dalke: Thanks. I'm in Sweden, so I wonder how well those resources will apply to me. Looking at the OWF I see it's US-based but it tries hard to be international, and I see one thing I don't like; the requirement for attribution. It does look like they are the people to talk to. Thanks for the pointer!