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

Re: [XP] Continuous Testing

Expand Messages
  • glbrown@inebraska.com
    ... I don t know either. If you are as good at TDD and simple design as I imagine you are, your defect rate is probably something less than 1 per 1KLOC.
    Message 1 of 70 , Sep 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Quoting Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>:

      > On Tuesday, August 31, 2004, at 10:26:32 PM, glbrown@... wrote:
      >
      > > Quoting Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>:
      >
      > > <snip>
      >
      > >> I do know that my code, with TDD, is very free of defects compared to
      > what
      > >> I used to write with nothing but compiler diagnostics and sporadic
      > testing
      > >> to help me. I still don't know whether intense scrutiny would find
      > >> additional things, but I can certainly see why it might.
      >
      > > But at what cost? What potential ROI?
      >
      > I don't know. Until I try it, how could I know?

      I don't know either. If you are as good at TDD and simple design as I imagine
      you are, your defect rate is probably something less than 1 per 1KLOC. Those
      defects are probably of the subtle, non-obvious variety. It is likely to take
      a long time for an inspection process to identify them.

      Maybe your code is good enough without the extra expense.?!?

      Gary Brown

      >
      > Ron Jeffries
      > www.XProgramming.com
      > Will Turner: In a fair fight I'd kill you.
      > Jack Sparrow: That's not much incentive for me to fight fair, then, is it?
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > 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
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Kari Hoijarvi
      Thanks, I add it to my tool list to check out. Kari ... From: Williams, Chris [mailto:chris.williams@crt.xerox.com] ... In the absence of peer code reviews, I
      Message 70 of 70 , Sep 2, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks, I add it to my tool list to check out.

        Kari

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Williams, Chris [mailto:chris.williams@...]

        > good up to certain point. Finding bugs with adding tests later is
        > notoriously inefficient. Reviews rock.

        In the absence of peer code reviews, I found FindBugs to be helpful. Caught
        many gaffes of mine with equals(), hashCode(), exposing internal objects,
        waits and notifies, etc.

        http://findbugs.sourceforge.net/

        I definitely recommend it for the Java folks out there. I use it
        intermittently to just double-check myself, since my workplace doesn't do XP
        (gasp!) or code reviews.

        Chris
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.