Reputation
3,062
Next privilege 3,500 Rep.
Protect questions
Badges
1 6 33
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~122k people reached

May
12
comment How do you prepare yourself for a testing position?
+1 for OP having a good idea of the basics - I was trying to figure out from glowcoder's questions and answers if (s)he was already an SDET or a really savvy dev.
May
12
revised Is a distinction between “testing” and “checking” useful?
added 417 characters in body
May
12
comment How do you provide proper tests when there is little documentation
+1 for writing up assumptions and exploratory testing for "undocumented features"
May
11
awarded  Quorum
May
11
awarded  Editor
May
11
revised What the most efficient way of testing cross platform (i.e. iOS and Android) applications?
added 850 characters in body; added 200 characters in body; added 316 characters in body
May
11
answered What the most efficient way of testing cross platform (i.e. iOS and Android) applications?
May
11
comment Do you test using VM, User Agent, MutlipleIE etc?
I think the only reasons to mention company names are (a) the company name is recognizable (b) the info is positive (c) the use of the company name adds credibility, e.g., "This is how Fog Creek does things" or "Google does that" or "Microsoft and Amazon do this differently, but both approaches seem to work OK". I mention my previous experiences at MS by name when appropriate and positive, but not my current (small and unrecognized) employer.
May
11
answered How do you provide proper tests when there is little documentation
May
11
comment What is meant by “Automated tests don't find new bugs”?
But . . . I usually didn't test the code before creating them. It's pretty rare that the code was finished before I made my tests. I thought that parallel development of tests and code was standard?
May
11
awarded  Scholar
May
11
accepted What is meant by “Automated tests don't find new bugs”?
May
11
comment Testing interactions with external systems
I wanted to add . . . a well-designed fixture can be used for both mock and E2E tests; just make the API service configurable, so you can point it at either your mock service or the real one. This also allows you to test for possible changes to Twitter's API, e.g., what if that method that currently never returns null now does someday? You can't test that with a real API call! @glowcoder, sorry for referencing you in the last comment, I misread your comment :)
May
11
comment Testing interactions with external systems
@Traroth, @glocoder, there is definitely a difference in philosophy between mock testing and standard testing. This article touches on it: stephenwalther.com/blog/archive/2008/06/12/… I like to mix the philosophies: I verify that the API is called correctly in the mocked tests (the majority of my tests), which generate fast tests that can often be run on build and are more useful. I verify that the API does what I expect in E2E tests, which are fewer in number and slower - but I'm covering less surface area, because I covered the rest in my mocked tests.
May
11
comment What is meant by “Automated tests don't find new bugs”?
yeah, I'm picking that up. I'm finding it frustrating, because automated testing can and should be thought of as being - at least potentially - so much more. Anyways, I think I've found a new pet peeve :) Time to go laugh at myself!
May
11
answered How do I convince management that we need a formal QA department?
May
11
asked Is a distinction between “testing” and “checking” useful?
May
11
comment What is meant by “Automated tests don't find new bugs”?
The statement, "If you run a test with the same input, it should have the same output" breaks down for other types of testing besides fuzzing - stability testing often is "run until it breaks", testing features with inherent randomness can't have this feature (e.g., I'm testing a random sampling feature right now), etc. Someone distinguished between "testing" and "checking" once, but I can't find the articles - but I thought that was a useful distinction.
May
11
awarded  Commentator
May
11
comment What is meant by “Automated tests don't find new bugs”?
Thanks, Bruce, I thought that was the distinction you were aiming at. I appreciate your patience in clarifying these terms for me. I think the concepts got conflated because testers so naturally added in semi-random data with their random testing (since it's a fairly small set of changes to the fuzzing tool to have it run semi-random data as well).