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

Re: [XP] Automated acceptance tests

Expand Messages
  • Mark Striebeck
    Hi Bob, the cost of failure is not that high in this case. No data corruption, no access violation or anything serious. We have just started with automating
    Message 1 of 18 , Apr 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Bob,

      the cost of failure is not that high in this case. No data corruption,
      no access violation or anything serious.

      We have just started with automating our acceptance tests and I try to
      push everyone to be as rigorous and thorough as possible at this point.
      Once we have more experience with these automated tests we might be able
      to make more educated decisions but I don't feel that we know enough
      about it now.

      The tests themselfes are complex to write because they need a lot of
      data in the system. And because we just started out to automate the
      acceptence tests we have only a few utility classes available. Once we
      have those, I guees it will be much easier to plug a complex test together.

      Thanks
      MarkS

      Robert C. Martin wrote:

      >Mark,
      >
      >What's the cost of failure? If the cost is high, then find a way to write
      >the tests. If you can afford an occasional failure and can quickly recover
      >from it, then it may not be worth writing exhaustive tests.
      >
      >Having said that it seems odd to me that you could test it once, and then
      >find it hard to test it many times. Perhaps there is a way to make the
      >tests simpler.
      >
      >-----
      >Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob)
      >Object Mentor Inc.
      >unclebob@...
      >800-338-6716
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >>-----Original Message-----
      >>From: Mark Striebeck [mailto:mstriebeck@...]
      >>Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 3:51 PM
      >>To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
      >>Subject: [XP] Automated acceptance tests
      >>
      >>
      >>Hi,
      >>
      >>we are writing HttpUnit tests for all our acceptance tests. Now, we got
      >>a new UI widget for our data lists (the option to select how many lines
      >>you want to see). It's quite an effort to write the automated tests for
      >>this. On the other side all of the lists will use the same custom tag.
      >>
      >>We decided to write one elaborate test that tests one list exhaustively
      >>and test for the other lists only that the custom tag is on the list and
      >>can be invoked. But we won't do the exhaustive test for the other lists.
      >>
      >>The engineers are 100% convinced that there is no way that it works for
      >>one list and then fails for one other list.
      >>
      >>Sounds technically fine, but I and our QA manager are sort of quivering
      >>by the thought of having some functionality that is not 100% acceptance
      >>tested but 100% unit and a little acceptance tested.
      >>
      >>Are you normally automating ALL acceptance tests or do you make sometime
      >>"educated" decisions like this?
      >>
      >>MarkS
      >>
      >>
      >>To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      >>
      >>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      >>extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      >>
      >>ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
      >>Yahoo! Groups Links
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      >To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      >
      >To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      >
      >ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
      >Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.