[TIP] A rare philosophical thought
C. Titus Brown
ctb at msu.edu
Fri Aug 1 11:16:33 PDT 2008
On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 01:01:59PM -0500, Bob Clancy wrote:
-> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 1:28 PM, C. Titus Brown wrote:
-> >... "testing" is really just "running the code", under actual or
-> >likely-to-be actual circumstances.?? The quality of your test effort
-> >be measured by how reflective it is of the actual circumstances under
-> >which the code will be used, and the cost of the mismatches.
-> Testing goes further than your definition above. It also has to include
-> things that "might" go wrong (prioritized by risk and impact). In other
-> words, testing should be a little bit like defensive driving. Mybe my
-> view is a little more "classic QA" than what programmer testers normally
-> think of, but past experience has shown me that bugs often happen on the
-> fringes beyond what is obvious or usual. While "test driven" might not
-> encourage such corner cases, I believe they have to be added as time,
-> testing resources permit. It's important to use the risk and impact
-> measures so you don't go hog-wild creating useless tests that are not
-> productive in finding real bugs.
I think this is covered -- if the code is actually going to be used in
such a way that it crashes, or the program doesn't satisfy the actual
needs of the user, then that is an *actual circumstance* and a mismatch
between what was tested.
On other words, if a buggy bit of code is never actually run by anyone,
is it a bug in any real sense?
Ehh. I'm probably being too programmer-centric and perfectionist.
C. Titus Brown, ctb at msu.edu
More information about the testing-in-python