Hot answers tagged

30

A test is an experiment. You have a hypothesis, which is normally governed by a specification, such as "When I enter a username and password that I know to be valid and click login, I am brought past the login screen and to the dashboard." or "When I log in to the program with 10,000 simultaneous users, performance is no less than 95% of that when there are ...


16

I think the main reason why companies are not doing automated testing is because the "Return on Investment" is hard to prove. Also its hard to prove that you will have less defects in production due to these tests, since they will catch the obvious issues, but not the complex dependency issues that actual users might run into. The automated testing mindset ...


13

There are many reasons why companies choose not to invest in test automation. Some of the ones I've encountered include: The state of the software makes test automation non-viable. This is particularly common where an organization's flagship software is built in older code and technologies with massively intertwined GUI and logic (classic ASP comes to mind ...


10

That is really up to your organization and your relationship with your stakeholders. In most cases, testing is just a label with no specific meaning. The ultimate goal is to deliver a high-quality product. "Testing" is just a label for a kind of activity that might help you reach that goal. You can define that label however you want, but it is your ...


8

TLDR; The specific terminology that probably describes what he is asking for is smoke testing. The long version: You are arguing with your manger instead of working towards a solution. Terminology is important, but so is communication and getting the job done. You haven't done unit or integration testing, you probably haven't done any performance or ...


7

The flaw of your analysis is that you are thinking like an engineer. You are asserting that the cost-benefit analysis shows that automated software testing is superior. But you forgot to specifiy which goals you are optimizing. The automated testing is only superior when you are looking at things like the quality of the end product, or the efficiency of the ...


6

Some large organizations don't eschew functional tests because they "can't be bothered with them", or "don't know better", but because they see them as a strategic liability. I work at The Guardian, and we rely on neither automated nor manual regression tests. Why? Automated tests have a long term cost. Anybody who has maintained a regression suite in a ...


5

Without testing, how would you know it works right? And if it does not have to work right, why would you spend resources on it? When it passed tests, it means is is "DONE" - and you need to agree what "DONE" means. Testing is the difference between Wally (from Dilbert cartoon) saying "it worked for me, my test file in my browser did not crashed" and saying ...


5

Testing is validating a situation on a set of conditions. In your case you validate if it runs, you could say "I am going to test if it builds". This would mean you are actual testing something. From a SDLC perspective you are actual just coding and checking if you think it works and is good enough, this it not testing. Testing is actually a bit more ...


5

It depends. Every application is different. Every organization is different. Every organization and application has a different risk tolerance that determines how many of your test cases need to be part of your regression suite. At one extreme, any test case that hasn't been deprecated by changes to the application is part of the regression test suite. ...


4

This doesn't have a single answer; it depends on the state of the code and the level you're testing at. At a high level, regression tests are tests that you have for things that currently work in the product, and should continue to work the same way in the future. So in order to identify regression tests, you need to identify parts of the program that ...


4

Your problem is very simply a confusion of semantics. The word "testing" is too broad, hence allowing wildly different interpretations. It just makes no sense to talk about "testing" without saying what you actually mean. Someone mentioned "definition of done". This is what you are looking for; it is a contract between you and your customer. The DoD can be ...


3

The TL;DR answer: No. The explanation: Running code during development, on the developer's machine, is simply iterative development. Running it on another system (one that does not have the development environment and does not compile the code first) can be considered smoke-testing. That said, here's what I'd suggest you do, given that your application ...


2

It is highly unlikely unless they have a bug bounty program or crowd sourced testing that you could participate in. Typically most companies, especially start ups, get defects reported on a rather regular basis from end-users for free.


2

Assuming that you're mentoring the Tester whom you want to appreciate for his work the email would be like as below:- Thanks for improving the value of our product by finding this XX critical Bug. Thank you for taking initiative and going beyond the scope in your testing. We encourage your Out of the box nature and heartfully appreciate your efforts and ...


2

Instead of voting for closing I am going to use your question as an example to how not to ask questions. How are we supposed to know what do you need ? we don't know what the product is, what are the company's future plans for the product or testing, what is the budget and how much time do you have or can spend automating stuff, what's your priorities, how ...


2

I don't know on which ISTQB site you found the example but I found a PDF with examples here (see #24). In contrast to the exercise you posted, the example above mention the usage of a method called decision table technique. You should solve it using decision tables because you are in the context of ISTQB and and should be prepare yourself for the test and ...


1

It simplifies to knowing what you want to measure and knowing how to determine when you have measured it. Entry criteria include: Knowing what sort of performance you are looking at. Eg maximum load, use of system resources at various loads, affect on response times as load increases, long term stability (eg memory loss), and several others. Stability of ...


1

Ask clarification questions, and lead the other side to give you an answer. It's always a good advice, but especially true for interview questions. Let's use your question as an example- How do you define performance testing ? what is our goal- do we want to verify the product can achieve X or do we want to investigate and find out what X is ? What are ...


1

Performance testing doesn't only mean many users hitting the same thing at the same time. There are various aspects of performance testing which you can opt to do manually. As you said you have to test a mobile application, you can test, Whether it works in the same seamless manner on a phone with low hardware, OS and memory configurations as it does on ...


1

You'd have to be nuts to go along with your "manager"'s approach to "testing". I write lots of complex code, and I can certainly go along with holding off on testing for a while -- at a prototype stage, clarifying requirements, data formats, type specifications, and so forth, are a more productive use of time (arguably). Testing is not magic and it doesn't ...


1

I run into this exact problem a surprising amount. People in various corners of the business use terms like "data" and "testing" ambiguously without themselves really understanding what they're asking when they utter these terms. So when we're constructing some throw-away proof of concept, our development plan may not include any period of formal functional ...


1

Developing without doing unit testing is, in my experience, similar to taking a used car for a test ride, without taking a look at the engine or any other components. Yes, you might make a long ride and experience no issues, but are you confident enough that this car is worth paying for? If this is how you do your development, it's entirely possible that ...


1

the question is: does running code equal testing? if it means launching the code and to observe it runs and loads the page or initial screen, yes, it would be considered a test - a smoke test if you will. but there's more to testing than just a smoke test. as others have mentioned, you would do justice to the project by performing other types of test e.g. ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible