Table C14 PSP0 Project Plan Summary

Student Rocio Preciado Rojas Date 07/03/2011

Program Calcular la correlacion Lineal Program # 3
Instructor Domingo Garcia Ornelas Language Java
Time in Phase (min.) Plan Actual To Date To Date %
Planning 43
Design 10
Code 39
Compile 1
Test 21
Postmortem 159
Total 90min 273

Defects Injected Actual To Date To Date %

Planning 0
Design 0
Code 6
Compile 0
Test 2
Total Development 8

Defects Removed Actual To Date To Date %

Planning 0
Design 0
Code 6
Compile 0
Test 2
Total Development 0
After Development
 2

Table C16 Time Recording Log

Student Rocio Preciado Rojas Date 07/03/2011

Instructor Domingo Garcia Ornelas Program # 3

Date Start Stop Interruption Delta Phase Comments

Time Time
07/03 9:45 3:14 286 43 Planing Fui a clases, a mi casa y a comer
/2011
3:15 3:25 10 Desing
3:26 4:05 39 Code
4:06 4:07 1 Compile
4:08 6:17 108 21 prueba Fiu hacer tareas
10/03 9:17 10:13 56 prueba
/2011
11/03 7:15 9:27 90 82 Prueba Fui a cenar
/2011
9:28 9:35 7 postmo
rtem
3
Defect Types
10 Documentation 60 Checking
20 Syntax 70 Data
30 Build, Package 80 Function 4
40 Assignment 90 System
50 Interface 100 Environment

Table C18 Defect Recording Log

Student Rocio Preciado Rojas Date 07/03/2011

Instructor Domingo Garcia Ornelas Program #
Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect
07/03/11 1 20 code compile 03 seg
Description: Me falto u n punto y coma al final de un system

Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect

07/03/11 2 80 code compile 1
Description:
Me equivo puse un while en lugar del for

Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect

07/03/11 3 20 code compile 3
Description:
Abri I una llave de mas

Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect

07/03/11 4 40 code compile 10 seg
Description:
Declare mal los arreglos

Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect

07/03/11 5 20 code Compile 13 seg
Description:
Falto un punto y coma al final de una asignacion

Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect

10/03/11 6 40 code prueba 3
Description:
Declare mal un tipo de variable es entera y la puse double

Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect

10/03/11 7 20 code prueba 10 seg
Description:
Agregue un system y no pude el punto y coma

Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect

10/03/11 8 80 code compile 1
Description:
O curio un desbordamiento de memoria en los arreglos

Date Number Type Inject Remove Fix Time Fix Defect

Description:
 5

Table C25 PSP0.1 Project Plan Summary

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language
Program Size (LOC) Plan Actual To Date
Base(B)
(Measured)
Deleted (D)
(Counted)
Modified (M)
(Counted)
Added (A)
(T-B+D-R)
Reused (R)
(Counted)
Total New & Changed (N)
(A+M)
Total LOC (T)
(Measured)
Total New Reused

Time in Phase (min.) Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Code
Compile
Test
Postmortem
Total

Defects Injected Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Code
Compile
Test
Total Development

Defects Removed Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Code
Compile
Test
Total Development
After Development
 6

Table C27 Process Improvement Proposal (PIP)

Student Date
Instructor Program #
Process Elements

PIP Number
Problem Description:

PROPOSAL
PIP # Proposal Description

Notes and Comments:

 7

Table C34 PSP1 Project Plan Summary

Student Rocio Preciado Rojas Date 07/03/2011

Program Calcular la Correlacion Program # 3
Instructor Domingo Garcia Ornelas Language Java
Summary Plan Actual To Date
LOC/Hour 39 39 100%

Program Size (LOC): Plan Actual To Date

Base(B) 35 33
(Measured) (Measured)
Deleted (D) 10 6
(Estimated) (Counted)
Modified (M) 6 11
(Estimated) (Counted)
Added (A) 5 4
(N-M) (T-B+D-R)
Reused (R) 9 7
(Estimated) (Counted)
Total New & Changed (N) 10 21
(Estimated) (A+M)
Total LOC (T) 65 61
(N+B-M-D+R) (Measured)
Total New Reused 3 7

Time in Phase (min.) Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning 30 43
Design 10 10
Code 45 39
Compile 1 1
Test 16 21
Postmortem 5 159
Total 107 273

Defects Injected Actual To Date To Date %

Planning 0
Design 0
Code 6
Compile 0
Test 2
Total Development 8

Defects Removed Actual To Date To Date %

Planning 0
Design 0
Code 6
Compile 0
Test 2
Total Development 8
After Development 0
 8

Table C37 Test Report Template

Student Date
Instructor Program #

Test Name/Number
Test Objective
Test Description

Test Conditions

Expected Results

Actual Results

Test Name/Number
Test Objective
Test Description

Test Conditions

Expected Results

Actual Results
 9

Table C39 Size Estimating Template

Student Date
Instructor Program #

BASE PROGRAM LOC ESTIMATE ACTUAL

BASE SIZE (B) => => => => => => => => => => 35 33
LOC DELETED (D) => => => => => => => => => 10 6
LOC MODIFIED (M) => => => => => => => => => 6 11
OBJECT LOC
BASE ADDITIONS TYPE1 METHODS REL. SIZE LOC LOC

TOTAL BASE ADDITIONS (BA) => => => => => =>
=>
NEW OBJECTS TYPE METHODS REL. SIZE LOC (New Reused*)

TOTAL NEW OBJECTS (NO) => => => => => => =>
REUSED OBJECTS

REUSED TOTAL (R) => => => => => => => => =>
SIZE TIME
Estimated Object LOC (E): E = BA+NO+M
Regression Parameters:  0 Size and Time
Regression Parameters: 1 Size and Time
Estimated New and Changed LOC (N): N =  0 + 1 *E
Estimated Total LOC: T=N+B-D-M+R
Estimated Total New Reuse (sum of * LOC):
Estimated Total Development Time: Time =  0 + 1 *E
Prediction Range: Range
Upper Prediction Interval: UPI = N + Range
Lower Prediction Interval: LPI = N - Range
Prediction Interval Percent:

1 L-Logic, I-I/O, C-Calculation, T-Text, D-Data, S-Set-up

 Table C45 PSP1.1 Project Plan Summary
Summary Plan Actual To Date
LOC/Hour
Planned Time
Actual Time
CPI(Cost-Performance Index)
(Planned/Actual)
% Reused
% New Reused
Program Size (LOC): Plan Actual To Date
Base(B)
(Measured) (Measured)
Deleted (D)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Modified (M)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Added (A)
(N-M) (T-B+D-R)
Reused (R)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Total New & Changed (N)
(Estimated) (A+M)
Total LOC (T)
(N+B-M-D+R) (Measured)
Total New Reused
Time in Phase (min.) Plan Actual To Date To Date %
Planning
Design
Code
Compile
Test
Postmortem
Total
Defects Injected Actual To Date To Date %
Planning
Design
Code
Compile
Test
Total Development
Defects Removed Actual To Date To Date %
Planning
Design
Code
Compile
Test
Total Development
After Development
 11
Table C47 Task Planning Template

Student Date
Project Instructor

Task Plan Actual

# Name Hours Planned Cumulative Cumulative Date Date Earned Cumulative
Value Hours Planned Monday Value Earned
Value Value

Totals
 12
Table C49 Schedule Planning Template

Student Date
Project Instructor

Plan Actual
Week Date Direct Cumulativ Cumulativ Direct Cumulativ Cumulativ Adjusted
e e e e
No. Monday Hours Hours Planned Hours Hours Earned Earned
Value Value Value
 13
Table C55 PSP2 Project Plan Summary

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language
Summary Plan Actual To Date
LOC/Hour
Planned Time
Actual Time
CPI(Cost-Performance Index)
(Planned/Actual)
% Reused
% New Reused
Test Defects/KLOC
Total Defects/KLOC
Yield %

Program Size (LOC): Plan Actual To Date

Base(B)
(Measured) (Measured)
Deleted (D)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Modified (M)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Added (A)
(N-M) (T-B+D-R)
Reused (R)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Total New & Changed (N)
(Estimated) (A+M)
Total LOC (T)
(N+B-M-D+R) (Measured)
Total New Reused
Upper Prediction Interval (70%)
Lower Prediction Interval (70%)

Time in Phase (min.) Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Postmortem
Total
Total Time UPI (70%)
Total Time LPI (70%)
(continued)
 14
Table C55 PSP2 Project Plan Summary (continued)

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language

Defects Injected Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Total Development

Defects Removed Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Total Development
After Development

Defect Removal Efficiency Plan Actual To Date

Defects/Hour - Design review
Defects/Hour - Code review
Defects/Hour - Compile
Defects/Hour - Test
DRL(DLDR/UT)
DRL(CodeReview/UT)
DRL(Compile/UT)
 15
Table C57 C++ PSP2 Design Review Checklist

PROGRAM NAME AND #:

Purpose To guide you in conducting an effective design review
General As you complete each review step, check that item in the box to the
right.
Complete the checklist for one program unit before you start to review
the next.
Complete Ensure that the requirements, specifications, and high-level design are
completely covered by the design:
- all specified outputs are produced
- all needed inputs are furnished
- all required includes are stated
Logic Verify that program sequencing is proper:
- that stacks, lists, etc. are in the proper order
- that recursion unwinds properly
Verify that all loops are properly initiated, incremented, and
terminated
Special Cases Check all special cases:
- empty, full, minimum, maximum, negative, zero
- out of limits, overflow, underflow
- ensure "impossible" conditions are absolutely impossible
- handle all incorrect input conditions
Functional use Verify that all functions, procedures, or objects are fully understood
and properly used
Verify that all externally referenced abstractions are precisely defined
Names Verify that:
- all special names and types are clear or specifically defined
- the scopes of all variables and parameters are self-evident or defined
- all named objects are used within their declared scopes
Standards Review the design for conformance to all applicable design standards
 16
Table C58 C++ Code Review Checklist

PROGRAM NAME AND #:

Purpose To guide you in conducting an effective code review.
General As you complete each review step, check that item in the box to the
right.
Complete the checklist for one program unit before you start to
review the next.
Complete Verify that the code covers all the design.
Includes Verify that includes are complete
Initialization Check variable and parameter initialization:
- at program initiation
- at start of every loop
- at function/procedure entry
Calls Check function call formats:
- pointers
- parameters
- use of '&'
Names Check name spelling and use:
- is it consistent?
- is it within declared scope?
- do all structures and classes use '.' reference?
Strings Check that all strings are
- identified by pointers and
- terminated in NULL.
Pointers Check that
- pointers are initialized NULL
- pointers are deleted only after new, and
- new pointers are always deleted after use.
Output Format Check the output format:
- line stepping is proper
- spacing is proper
{} Pairs Ensure that the {} are proper and matched
Logic Verify the proper use of ==, =, ||, and so on.
Operators Check every logic function for proper ().
Line by Line Check every LOC for
Check - instruction syntax and
- proper punctuation.
Standards Ensure that the code conforms to the coding standards.
File Open and Verify that all files are
Close - properly declared,
- opened, and
- closed.
 17
Table C63 PSP2.1 Project Plan Summary
Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language
Summary Plan Actual To Date
LOC/Hour
Planned Time
Actual Time
CPI(Cost-Performance Index)
(Planned/Actual)
% Reused
% New Reused
Test Defects/KLOC
Total Defects/KLOC
Yield %
% Appraisal COQ
% Failure COQ
COQ A/F Ratio

Program Size (LOC): Plan Actual To Date

Base(B)
(Measured) (Measured)
Deleted (D)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Modified (M)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Added (A)
(N-M) (T-B+D-R)
Reused (R)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Total New & Changed (N)
(Estimated) (A+M)
Total LOC (T)
(N+B-M-D+R) (Measured)
Total New Reused
Upper Prediction Interval (70%)
Lower Prediction Interval (70%)

Time in Phase (min.) Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Postmortem
Total
Total Time UPI (70%)
Total Time LPI (70%)
(continued)
 18
Table C63 PSP2.1 Project Plan Summary (continued)

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language

Defects Injected Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Total Development

Defects Removed Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
Design
Design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Total Development
After Development

Defect Removal Efficiency Plan Actual To Date

Defects/Hour - Design review
Defects/Hour - Code review
Defects/Hour - Compile
Defects/Hour - Test
DRL(DLDR/UT)
DRL(CodeReview/UT)
DRL(Compile/UT)
 19
Table C65 C++ PSP2.1 Design Review Checklist

PROGRAM NAME AND #:

Purpose To guide you in conducting an effective design review
General As you complete each review step, check that item in the box to the
right.
Complete the checklist for one program unit before you start to review
the next.
Complete Ensure that the requirements, specifications, and high-level design are
completely covered by the design:
- all specified outputs are produced
- all needed inputs are furnished
- all required includes are stated
State machine Verify the state machine design:
- The structure has no hidden traps or loops.
- It is complete - that is, all possible states have been identified.
- It is orthogonal - that is, for every set of conditions there is one and
only one possible next state.
- The transitions from each state are complete and orthogonal. That
is, from every state, a unique next state is defined for every
possible combination of state machine input values.
Logic Verify that program sequencing is proper:
- that stacks, lists, etc. are in the proper order
- that recursion unwinds properly
Verify that all loops are properly initiated, incremented, and
terminated
Special Cases Check all special cases:
- empty, full, minimum, maximum, negative, zero
- out of limits, overflow, underflow
- ensure "impossible" conditions are absolutely impossible
- handle all incorrect input conditions
Functional use Verify that all functions, procedures, or objects are fully understood
and properly used
Verify that all externally referenced abstractions are precisely defined
Names Verify that:
- all special names and types are clear or specifically defined
- the scopes of all variables and parameters are self-evident or defined
- all named objects are used within their declared scopes
Standards Review the design for conformance to all applicable design standards
 20
Table C66 Operational Scenario Template

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language

Construct operational scenarios to cover the normal and abnormal program uses,
including user errors:

Scenario # User Objective:

Scenario Objective:
Source: Step Action: Comments
 21
Table C68 Functional Specification Template

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language

Object/class name Parent Classes Attributes

Method declaration Method external specification
 22
Table C70 State Specification Template

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language
Object Routine

State #1 description attributes

next state #1 transition conditions

next state #2
...
...
next state # n
State #2 description attributes

next state #1 transition conditions

next state #2
...
...
next state # n
...

State #n description attributes

next state #1 transition conditions

next state #2
...
...
next state # n
 23
Table C72 Logic Specification Template

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language
Object Function

INCLUDES:

TYPE DEFINITIONS:

Declaration:
Reference:

logic reference Program logic, in pseudocode

numbers
 24
Table C80 PSP3 Project Plan Summary
Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language
Summary Plan Actual To Date
LOC/Hour
Planned Time
Actual Time
CPI(Cost-Performance Index)
(Planned/Actual)
% Reused
% New Reused
Test Defects/KLOC
Total Defects/KLOC
Yield
% Appraisal COQ
% Failure COQ
COQ A/F Ratio
Program Size (LOC): Plan Actual To Date
Base(B)
(Measured) (Measured)
Deleted (D)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Modified (M)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Added (A)
(N-M) (T-B+D-R)
Reused (R)
(Estimated) (Counted)
Total New & Changed (N)
(Estimated) (A+M)
Total LOC (T)
(N+B-M-D+R) (Measured)
Total New Reused
Upper Prediction Interval (70%)
Lower Prediction Interval (70%)
Time in Phase (min.) Plan Actual To Date To Date %
Planning
High-level design
High-level design review
Detailed design
Detailed design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Postmortem
Total
Total Time UPI (70%)
Total Time LPI (70%)
(continued)
 25
Table C80 PSP3 Project Plan Summary (continued)

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language

Defects Injected Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
High-level design
High-level design review
Detailed design
Detailed design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Total Development

Defects Removed Plan Actual To Date To Date %

Planning
High-level design
High-level design review
Detailed design
Detailed design review
Code
Code review
Compile
Test
Total Development
After Development

Defect Removal Efficiency Plan Actual To Date

Defects/Hour - Design review
Defects/Hour - Code review
Defects/Hour - Compile
Defects/Hour - Test
DRL(DLDR/UT)
DRL(CodeReview/UT)
DRL(Compile/UT)
 26
Table C82 Cycle Summary
Plan ___ Actual ___

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language

Cycles To Date 1 2 3 4 5 Total

Program Size (LOC):
Base(B)
Deleted (D)
Modified (M)
Added (A)
Reused (R)
Total New & Changed (N)
Total LOC (T)
Total New Reused
Time in Phase (min.)
Design
Design Review
Code
Code Review
Compile
Test
Total
Defects Injected
Design
Design Review
Code
Code Review
Compile
Test
Total
Defects Removed
Design
Design Review
Code
Code Review
Compile
Test
Total
 27
Table C84 C++ PSP3 Design Review Checklist

PROGRAM NAME AND #:

Purpose To guide you in conducting an effective design review
General As you complete each review step, check that item in the box to the
right.
Complete the checklist for one program unit before you start to review
the next.
As you encounter issues that must be deferred, record them in the
issue tracking log.
Complete Ensure that the requirements, specifications, and high-level design are
completely covered by the design:
- all specified outputs are produced
- all needed inputs are furnished
- all required includes are stated
State machine Verify the state machine design:
- The structure has no hidden traps or loops.
- It is complete - that is, all possible states have been identified.
- It is orthogonal - that is, for every set of conditions there is one and
only one possible next state.
- The transitions from each state are complete and orthogonal. That
is, from every state, a unique next state is defined for every possible
combination of state machine input values.
Logic Verify that program sequencing is proper:
- that stacks, lists, etc. are in the proper order
- that recursion unwinds properly
Verify that all loops are properly initiated, incremented, and
terminated
Use defined methods such as: execution tables, trace tables, or
mathematical verification
Special Cases Check all special cases:
- empty, full, minimum, maximum, negative, zero
- out of limits, overflow, underflow
- ensure "impossible" conditions are absolutely impossible
- handle all incorrect input conditions
Functional use Verify that all functions, procedures, or objects are fully understood
and properly used
Verify that all externally referenced abstractions are precisely defined
Names Verify that:
- all special names and types are clear or specifically defined
- the scopes of all variables and parameters are self-evident or defined
- all named objects are used within their declared scopes
Standards Review the design for conformance to all applicable design standards
 28
Table C85 PSP Issue Tracking Log

Student Date
Program Program #
Instructor Language

Issue #: Date: Phase:

Description:

Resolution:
Date:
Issue #: Date: Phase:
Description:

Resolution:
Date:
Issue #: Date: Phase:
Description:

Resolution:
Date:
Issue #: Date: Phase:
Description:

Resolution:
Date:
Issue #: Date: Phase:
Description:

Resolution:
Date: