Skip to main content

Testing drunk

(My first blog writing ever.)

I've been thinking a long time that it's funny how many bugs I find by accident. Try to do something, make a mistake and boom - a bug is found. 

Making the mistakes intentionally doesn't quite work - that's why they are called accidents I guess.. So I've thought of ways to make myself more prone to accidents, coming up with an apparent one; testing drunk. TUI (testing under the influence).

So this I gotta try. More to come on that later.

Comments

  1. First try failed. Too drunk.

    Need to start testing part earlier next time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Are you sure you will do right mistakes when you're drunk? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Miika, and thanks for your comment! First one ever here :)

    On your question, I don't think there are right or wrong, just different kind of mistakes.

    More important than that is that you make as various kind of mistakes as possible. Believe it or not, but just yesterday a tester of mine found a bug by accident, after making three mistakes in a row, and then when undoing his steps a problem was noticed -> one of the mistakes done (correctly) triggered an action on another object, but undoing the action didn't undo the action performed on the other object. And that was a valid semi-serious bug. How marvellous!

    In the drunken part I see a problem though, as after mistakes are made, the problems might still not be that obvious and that's where perception should kick in. And drunken perception might not be that effective..

    Fortunately there are other ways to make accidents happen that I have thought of (so my liver still has a chance). My tester fell into one which is trying to do many things at the same time. Trying to do stuff really quickly is another quite common one and pretty easy to mimic. Can you Miika think of any other ones?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I don't report bugs

I don't report bugs . Bug is such a loaded word that people understand very differently, that instead of using it and explaining what I mean by it I rather just use other words. Like observations, thoughts, surprises, ideas, alternatives, or something similar. (And no I don't use fault, defect, or error either). Bug has also quite a negative connotation. "Reporting a bug" is kind of like telling someone that they've been served. And as we are actually giving away the gift of information, why wrap it in such a nasty package? And maybe more importantly it is very likely that whatever you might have to say is wrong. If not plain wrong, then at least incomplete. So I like to approach the kind of situations with the assumption that I am probably wrong. Cutting off anything that might sound arrogant makes stuff quite a lot easier. Especially after you realise later on that you have been wrong. I leave plenty of observations unreported . I don't want to waste

Testers of past be the IT stars of the future?

Been noticing two a bit conflicting themes lately. 1. Testers getting (or pushed) to be more technical and write test automation code 2. Articles listing future IT core skills as widely non-technical So whereas many testers are moving to work more on test automation, the vital skills of the future may be such as: - Creativity -  Analytical (critical) thinking  -  Activ e  learning  with a growth mindset   -  Judgment and decision making -  Interpersonal communication skills - Complex Problem Solving Which sounds almost like a list of vital skills needed for an exploratory tester.  So we should perhaps remind the ones starting a testing career or moving away from it, that also these skills are something that can be quite valuable in the future as well. Maybe even the most valuable.