I think if I was limited to only three test case methods I would really want to know what I was designing for. For instance, if I was working on some sort of program that was likely to be the target of a lot of external attacks I might be more focused on incorporating testing for abuse of the system. However, for a general selection of different methods I would likely focus on the following three:

Equivalence Testing:

Why:

Equivalence testing appears to be a good “catch all” for testing a unit. As opposed to having to test every possible input in a system you can generalize by grouping up inputs with similar aspects. You can then test a few inputs that qualify for those various groups and verify that the output is accurate. Additionally, this method seems as though it would be time and cost effective in comparison to some other methods and likely catch some of the bigger problems that …show more content…
By traversing the potential paths, I could attempt to simulate all possible accessibility in the program. It would be a major issue if we expected a certain sequence of events to occur and there is a failure to proceed correctly, failure to report an error or continue to function without the appropriate action being taken.

Example:

If I was working on a design for a multi branching adventure game story I would want to make sure either that certain points in the story were always reached, such as the end or important plot points throughout. By running a test that traverses all possible points in the world tree of the story we could make sure that the flow of the program would progress forward correctly and return to the appropriate states no matter what options or decisions a user might make at any given point in the