ANALISIS PERBANDINGAN UNIT TEST AUTOMATION FRAMEWORK DENGAN METODE THE DISTANCE TO THE IDEAL ALTERNATIF
Abstract
This Study aims to analyze and compare four unit test automation frameworks, namely EvoSuite, Randoop, Squaretest, and Github Copilot, using the Distance to Ideal Alternative(DIA) method. The four frameworks were evaluated based on three main parameters, Technical Economic View, Testing Process View, and Quality Standard View. The DIA method was chosen because of its advantage in providing more consistent results by calculating the distance to positive and negative ideal alternative solutions. This research collects data through questionnaires distributed to developers who have experience in the unit testing program. The result showed that Github Copilot occupies the best position in almost all aspects, especially in programming language flexibility and ease of use. However, it has a weakness in subscription fees. The results of this study are expected to guide software developers in choosing a test automation framework that suits their needs, both from a technical economic perspective, as well as increase the literature related to the performance and effectiveness of unit testing tools in software development.
Downloads
References
Abdulwareth, A. J., & Al-Shargabi, A. A. (2021). Toward a multi-criteria framework for selecting software testing tools. IEEE Access, 9, 158872–158891.
Agung Widhi Kurniawan, Z. P. (2016). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif. Pandiva Buku.
Ariqah, A. (2023). Unit Testing atau Pengujian Unit Aplikasi Inventaris pada Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Malang.
Ayan, B., Abacıoğlu, S., & Basilio, M. P. (2023). A comprehensive review of the novel weighting methods for multi-criteria decision-making. Information, 14(5), 285.
Brooke, J. (2013). SUS: a retrospective. Journal of Usability Studies, 8(2).
Daka, E., Campos, J., Fraser, G., Dorn, J., & Weimer, W. (2015). Modeling readability to improve unit tests. Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, 107–118.
Dinella, E., Ryan, G., Mytkowicz, T., & Lahiri, S. K. (2022). Toga: A neural method for test oracle generation. Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2130–2141.
Fewster, M., & Graham, D. (1999). Software test automation. Addison-Wesley Reading.
Fontes, A., Gay, G., Neto, F. G. de O., & Feldt, R. (2021). Automated support for unit test generation: a tutorial book chapter. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2110.13575.
Fraser, G., & Arcuri, A. (2011). Evosuite: automatic test suite generation for object-oriented software. Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium and the 13th European Conference on Foundations of Software Engineering, 416–419.
Hasibuan, A. N., & Dirgahayu, T. (2021). Pengujian dengan Unit Testing dan Test case pada Proyek Pengembangan Modul Manajemen Pengguna. AUTOMATA, 2(1).
Jun, L. N., Suhery, C., & Ristian, U. (n.d.). Sistem Seleksi Penerimaan Siswa Baru Sma Taruna Bumi Khatulistiwa Menggunakan Metode The Distance To The Ideal Alternative. Coding Jurnal Komputer Dan Aplikasi, 7(02).
Kua, P. (2019). Unit Testing. URL: Https://Www. Thekua. Com/Publications/AppsUnitTesting. Pdf.
Lestari, Y. D., & Lubis, Y. F. A. (2022). Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Pemilihan Tempat Kegiatan Olahraga di Medan dengan Metode Distance To The Ideal Alternative (DIA). Jurnal Komputer Teknologi Informasi Dan Sistem Informasi (JUKTISI), 1(2), 56–64.
Muharam, C. S., Kusnendi, N., Fauzi, M. I., Yoseptry, R., & Wasliman, E. D. (2024). Efektivitas Model Pembelajaran Teaching Factory (Tefa) Dalam Meningkatkan Kualitas Lulusan Pada Smk Negeri Pertanian Pembangunan Cianjur. Edusaintek: Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains Dan Teknologi, 11(4), 1839–1853.
Nugroho, M. O., & Cahyono, A. B. (2024). Perancangan Ui/Ux Digital Signage Untuk Peningkatan Akses Informasi Di Fakultas Teknologi Industri Uii. Edusaintek: Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains Dan Teknologi, 11(2), 445–462.
Pacheco, C., & Ernst, M. D. (2007). Randoop: feedback-directed random testing for Java. Companion to the 22nd ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems and Applications Companion, 815–816.
Pelivani, E., & Cico, B. (2021). A comparative study of automation testing tools for web applications. 2021 10th Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing (MECO), 1–6.
Sauro, J., & Lewis, J. R. (2011). When designing usability questionnaires, does it hurt to be positive? Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2215–2224.
Tran, P. N., & Boukhatem, N. (2008). The distance to the ideal alternative (DiA) algorithm for interface selection in heterogeneous wireless networks. Proceedings of the 6th ACM International Symposium on Mobility Management and Wireless Access, 61–68.
Wang, Y., Mäntylä, M. V, Demeyer, S., Wiklund, K., Eldh, S., & Kairi, T. (2020). Software Test Automation Maturity--A Survey of the State of the Practice. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2004.09210.
Wang, Y., Mäntylä, M. V, Liu, Z., Markkula, J., & Raulamo‐jurvanen, P. (2022). Improving test automation maturity: A multivocal literature review. Software Testing, Verification and Reliability, 32(3), e1804.
Copyright (c) 2025 Rifaldi Fakhrii, Novi Setiani
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Jurnal allows anyone to compose, correct, and do derivative works, even for commercial purposes, as long as they credit for the original work. This license is the freest. It is recommended for maximum distribution and use of licensed material.
The submitted paper is assumed not to contain any proprietary materials that are not protected by patent rights or patent applications; The responsibility for technical content and protection of proprietary materials rests with the authors and their organizations and not the responsibility of journal or its editorial staff. The primary (first/appropriate) author is responsible for ensuring that the article has been viewed and approved by all other authors. The author's responsibility is to obtain all necessary copyright waivers to use any copyrighted material in the manuscript before submission.
Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains dan Teknologi allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and allow the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions. Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains dan Teknologi CC-BY-SA or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work. Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains dan Teknologi allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and allow the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions. Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains dan Teknologi CC-BY-SA or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work.
In developing strategy and setting priorities Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains dan Teknologi recognize that free access is better than priced access, libre access is better than free access, and libre under CC-BY-SA or the equivalent is better than libre under more restrictive open licenses. We should achieve what we can when we can. We should not delay achieving free in order to achieve libre, and we should not stop with free when we can achieve libre.
Jurnal Pendidikan, Sains dan Teknologi is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share a copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt a remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
