2 Matching Annotations
- May 2019
-
sd.jtimothyking.com sd.jtimothyking.com
-
Test-first reduces the cost of bugs. Bugs detected earlier are easier to fix. Bugs detected later are usually the result of many changes, and we don’t know which one caused the bug. So first we have to hunt for and find the bug. Then we have to refresh our memories on how the code is supposed to work, because we haven’t seen it for months. Then finally we understand enough to propose a solution. Anything that reduces the time between when we code the bug and when we detect it seems like a obvious win. We consider ourselves lucky to find out about bugs within a few days, before the code is shipped to SQA or to customers. But how about catching them within a few minutes? That’s what test-first accomplishes with the bugs it catches.
I find this very important because in this semester for our Administration of Software Projects class we had to cut the scope of our project due to constant bugs, there existing no tests, and the team being unfamiliarized with the technologies that were imposed to us by the teacher. Testing can really reduce the impact of bugs and reduce the constant increase of the cost-time curve of changes in the project.
-
- Apr 2019
-
www.xprogramming.com www.xprogramming.com
-
Our testers spent more time keeping the tests up to date and tracking down false failures and false successes than they did writing new tests.
What could possibly be done with current software industry practices, like Scrum, where changes are constant and expected, in respect to changing tests to match new outputs?
-