Skip to main content


Do you ever examine what you carry around with you every day, and wonder if you actually use it? For example, in my pockets I've got a 'smart' phone, wallet (credit & debit cards, cash and ID), keys, Travelcard (Oyster) and some coins. Every now and then something gets added, if its unlucky it stays. Over the years, I've noticed, that the criteria for being kept is usually convenience or enablement. That is, the items that don't get chucked or deposited somewhere about my home are usually 'tools' that make other 'things' easier like a smart-phone - I can just look up something or text someone at any time. I could just wait until I got back to my office, or see the person later but it can be easier to just act in the moment, and do it there and then.

Enablement items, are things that mean I -can- do things, that without, I'm stuck. For example: door keys. The smart phone fits into this category also, if I want to meet up with someone at short notice when I'm out, then a mobile phone is really the only practical option. Cash is another enablement device. In the same theme, I wear a watch. It enabled me to know the time, with the added convenience of a date function. The watch allows me to be less tardy, as it's a much better timekeeper than my brain.

The great inventions of our and recent times have tended to be enablement devices also. Aviation, antibiotics, motor car, personal computers, MRI, the Internet/telecommunications etc are all enablers. We can do things our ancestors couldn't, and we can do them affordably. These are all tools. They extend our reach and our capabilities.

We use tools everyday in software development. Some, like the things in my pockets, are junk, and I soon ditch them. Some I keep and reuse. But in the long run, it's the convenience and enabling tools that stick. It often seems to take me (at least) a while to notice which tools are helping, which are not helping or even hindering. Part of the problem is that some tools look like they work or at least -should- help but don't. But still I've noticed some tools or groups of tools that usually help, and in one form or another these have survived.

These include the following:

Randomness: - I have several scripts and tools that help me produce randomness in either text, numerical or event form. For example I have a script that produces a random series of UTF-8 codes, another that randomly clicks on parts of the user's graphical interface. This is an enabler. I noticed that I am not random, even when I think I am being random - I'm not. So these tools fill that gap and let me see what normally I couldn't: how a piece of software behaves with a variety of inputs [that are more diverse than I can dream up at the time]

Accurate - Record keeping: I use Blueberry TestAssistant to record everything I do on Windows. This screen recorder records the screen as well as logging all key presses. This enables me to keep accurate records of my work and findings, without much effort. This frees me to spend more time finding new issues, rather than being bogged down in manual note keeping. It also allows me to go back in time and search for issues I might have missed first time around.


Popular posts from this blog

The gamification of Software Testing

A while back, I sat in on a planning meeting. Many planning meetings slide awkwardly into a sort of ad-hoc technical analysis discussion, and this was no exception. With a little prompting, the team started to draw up what they wanted to build on a whiteboard.

The picture spoke its thousand words, and I could feel that the team now understood what needed to be done. The right questions were being asked, and initial development guesstimates were approaching common sense levels.

The discussion came around to testing, skipping over how they might test the feature, the team focused immediately on how long testing would take.

When probed as to how the testing would be performed? How we might find out what the team did wrong? Confused faces stared back at me. During our ensuing chat, I realised that they had been using BDD scenarios [only] as a metric of what testing needs to be done and when they are ready to ship. (Now I knew why I was hired to help)

There is nothing wrong with checking t…

Manumation, the worst best practice.

There is a pattern I see with many clients, often enough that I sought out a word to describe it: Manumation, A sort of well-meaning automation that usually requires frequent, extensive and expensive intervention to keep it 'working'.

You have probably seen it, the build server that needs a prod and a restart 'when things get a bit busy'. Or a deployment tool that, 'gets confused' and a 'test suite' that just needs another run or three.

The cause can be any number of the usual suspects - a corporate standard tool warped 5 ways to make it fit what your team needs. A one-off script 'that manager' decided was an investment and needed to be re-used... A well-intended attempt to 'automate all the things' that achieved the opposite.

They result in a manually intensive - automated process, where your team is like a character in the movie Metropolis, fighting with levers all day, just to keep the lights on upstairs. Manual-automation, manumatio…

Scatter guns and muskets.

Many, Many years ago I worked at a startup called (a European online travel company, back when a travel company didn't have to be online). For a while, I worked in what would now be described as a 'DevOps' team. A group of technical people with both programming and operational skills.

I was in a hybrid development/operations role, where I spent my time investigating and remedying production issues using my development, investigative and still nascent testing skills. It was a hectic job working long hours away from home. Finding myself overloaded with work, I quickly learned to be a little ruthless with my time when trying to figure out what was broken and what needed to be fixed.
One skill I picked up, was being able to distinguish whether I was researching a bug or trying to find a new bug. When researching, I would be changing one thing or removing something (etc) and seeing if that made the issue better or worse. When looking for bugs, I'd be casting…