Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: How fast should the UT run ?

Expand Messages
  • Anthony Williams
    ... Here s my take on Michael s point: If you have some tests that run slowly, and some that run fast, then it is better to separate the two, and run each
    Message 1 of 199 , Sep 20, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...> writes:

      > On Wednesday, September 7, 2005, at 9:35:52 AM, Michael Feathers wrote:
      >
      >> Ron Jeffries wrote:
      >
      >>>Please explain why deferring some test result information is not
      >>>harmful and why it doesn't inevitably have a slowing effect on the
      >>>team.
      >
      >> As we add tests we don't have a choice about whether we some information
      >> we get will be delayed, we do have a choice about whether we'll be able
      >> to get some information more quickly.
      >
      > Um ... even after I run that through my Captain Midnight decoder
      > ring, I don't see an answer to my question. Please try again.

      Here's my take on Michael's point:

      If you have some tests that run slowly, and some that run fast, then it is
      better to separate the two, and run each batch as often as you can. That has
      the consequence that you don't have to wait for the slow tests to get feedback
      from the fast ones, which is surely a good thing.

      It might also be worthwhile making the slow tests faster, but that's a
      separate issue.

      Anthony
      --
      Anthony Williams
      Software Developer
      Just Software Solutions Ltd
      http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk
    • Anthony Williams
      ... Here s my take on Michael s point: If you have some tests that run slowly, and some that run fast, then it is better to separate the two, and run each
      Message 199 of 199 , Sep 20, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...> writes:

        > On Wednesday, September 7, 2005, at 9:35:52 AM, Michael Feathers wrote:
        >
        >> Ron Jeffries wrote:
        >
        >>>Please explain why deferring some test result information is not
        >>>harmful and why it doesn't inevitably have a slowing effect on the
        >>>team.
        >
        >> As we add tests we don't have a choice about whether we some information
        >> we get will be delayed, we do have a choice about whether we'll be able
        >> to get some information more quickly.
        >
        > Um ... even after I run that through my Captain Midnight decoder
        > ring, I don't see an answer to my question. Please try again.

        Here's my take on Michael's point:

        If you have some tests that run slowly, and some that run fast, then it is
        better to separate the two, and run each batch as often as you can. That has
        the consequence that you don't have to wait for the slow tests to get feedback
        from the fast ones, which is surely a good thing.

        It might also be worthwhile making the slow tests faster, but that's a
        separate issue.

        Anthony
        --
        Anthony Williams
        Software Developer
        Just Software Solutions Ltd
        http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.