Lessons Learned In Software Testing

• Lessons Learned in Software Testing: A Context-Driven Approach by CemKaner, JamesBach and BretPettichord
• ISBN 978-0471081128 , ISBN 0471081124
• Publisher: Wiley; 1st edition (December 15, 2001)
• http://www.testinglessons.com/
• ProgrammingBookAcronym: LL

Describes ContextDrivenTesting. This book was written using a variation of the FowlerWritingMethod.

---

See inside: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0471081124/ref=lib_rd_ss/104-8306746-9103113?v=glance&s=books&vi=slide-show#reader-link

from the preface ...

<quote>

Here is everything that SWEBOK has to say about exploratory testing:

• Perhaps the most widely practiced technique remains ad hoc testing: Tests are derived relying on the tester skill and intuition ("exploratory" testing) and on his/her experience with similar programs. While a more systematic approach is advised, ad hoc testing might be useful (but only if the tester is really expert !) to identify special tests, not easily "captured" by formalized techniques. Moreover it must be reminded that this technique may yield largely varying degrees of effectiveness. (SWEBOK 0.95,2001,5-9)

How does SWEBOK treat what it acknowledges is the field's most widely practiced technique? Nothing about how to practice the technique well. Only a statement that exploration should be done only by real experts, that other approaches are advised, and the suggestion that other, formalized techniques will yield less varying degrees of effectiveness.

Hah!

</quote>

I understand this statement to mean that ad hoc testing, since it relies upon the skill and intuition of the tester, and as such has a higher likelihood of being successful when conducted by experts. It recognizes that formalized techniques may not address those situations requiring "special tests".

I do not recognize however what Hah! means. Does it mean the statement is in error, or that the statement should be ignored, or something else?

I think this exclamation meant to me : read on, there's much more to say about it than just "find an expert". Reminded me the trick : "Q: how would you (e.g.) sort a 20 Mb file with only 20 Kb RAM ? A: I'd ask a programmer to do it for me." To me, "find an expert" is a tail recursion to the problem at hand. Maybe the exclamation pointed that, maybe not.

---

This great book contains small topics you can pick at any time. It covers many aspect of software testing, and contains many insights about the role of the tester in a project. -- ChristopheThibaut

• If you have integrity, you can develop competence. If you've lost your integrity, your competence won't matter. ( lesson 153, p147)

---

I particularly like the section on automation because it states so clearly the basis on which automation should be judged. I'm working up what I think of as "reference designs" for XP acceptance tests. I will do my best to be sure they reflect nicely in the light of this book. Let me also say that I like very much the format of your book. It is what I had hoped the patterns community would routinely produce. The last time I saw a book I liked so much I asked to write the foreword. That was for Thomas and Hunt's "Pragmatic Programmer". -- WardCunningham

---

CategoryBook