Skip to main content

Make it or break it

Some times I am working on a project alone doing both design, planning, programming and testing. I have found it useful to separate these different kinds of work as much as possible. That's because programmers are not good testers. Programming and testing requires totally opposite mindsets:
  • Success as a programmer is to get something to work (make it)
  • Success as a tester is to find something that doesn't work (break it)
If I start testing while I'm in programming mode, I will not try very hard to break it, so lots of errors will slip through.

But on the other hand, I can easily get into programming from testing. When I am testing, I am working with an example, and the example helps me to focus my programming. But I try to avoid jumping from programming to testing anyway, because it is hard to get back to effective testing again.

1. Design
I get the best results if I start with designing a few examples of how the functionality will be used. The examples help me to focus and remember all details. I will also use them as my test specification. Then I create automatic tests based on these examples.

2. Implementation
The automatic tests will remind me what I need to do, so it's no problem to take lunch or end the work day now. But often I am so focused that I just continue with implementation until all the automatic tests pass. After this I take lunch or a long break before I start manual testing.

3. Manual testing
I don't write a test specification for myself, I just run through the examples I designed in the beginning. If I find any errors, I don't fix them right away, but write them down in a test log. When I have tested everything, I can get back to programming again. Since I have some automatic tests in place, it's usually easy to add some more tests that captures the errors.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Database dump with Java

I need to update a database that is created by PHP. The problem is that I am not a PHP coder, but a Java coder, and I need to use some other Java libraries to get the job done. So how can find out exactly which tables to update and how? It would take me weeks to search the PHP code, and I still wouldn't be sure if I got it right.

The first step is to install a clean application on my computer. There is no user data in the database, so if I perform commands like creating a user etc in the web application, I can look at what changed in the database. I'm sure that could be done in MySQL, but I'm not an expert on that either. When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. So, I'll use Java for that to.

So, I wrote a small Java application that produces exactly the output that I need. It reads metadata from the database to find all tables and columns, lists that metadata and the content of all the rows.

Here it is:import java.io.FileNotFoundException;
im…

The Future of Programming

The problem with abstractions Programmers are experts in abstract thinking. To program is to generalize: A method is a general specification of different execution paths. A class is a general specification of objects. A superclass is a generalization of several classes.

Although our minds are capable of abstract thinking, concrete thinking is more natural, and concrete examples are the foundation for abstractions. For instance, how do you teach children what a car is? You don't give a definition like: 'A car is a wheeled motor vehicle used for transporting passengers.' Instead, you point at a car and say: 'Look, a car!' After seeing a few cars, the child understands what a car is.


Notice what I just did! I started with a general principle and then gave an example. Which part of the paragraph above is easier to understand, the first sentence (general) or the rest (example)?

Einstein said that examples is not another way to teach, it is the only way to teach. It is…

World War 2, Rationalism and Agile Development

One of the central values of the Agile Manifesto is Responding to change over following a plan. This doesn't mean that it's not agile to make a plan. You should have a plan, but you should realize the limitations of the plan.

Are there any parallels to this in history?

The Soviet Union had 5-year plans. Stalin was quite succesful in industrializing the rural country in a short span of time. But his methods did not work well in the battlefield. In the 2nd world war, the Soviet suffered severe losses in the beginning.

You can plan how to build and manage a factory, because the complexity is limited. But a war is far more complex. You cannot predict what the enemy is going to do. This doesn't mean that you should go to war without a plan. Far from it, you should plan as much as possible, but be prepared to improvize when something unexpected happens. As Dwight D. Eisenhower, a successful American general in World War 2, said: "Plans are nothing; planning is everything."…