skip to main content

Blog | About me

You might not need to fix your flakey tests

There’s a toxic cycle that can be caused by flakey tests. The more unreliable tests are, the less likely you are to trust their results. At best, it means wasted time as people re-run a failing step in an automated pipeline until they get the result they want. It then takes 2 or 3 times… Read more

Coffee break tests: An exercise in test design

Let’s think about an example test scenario. We’re given a program called MoverBot that is responsible for distributing a data file created by another program, OutputBot, to several servers. Since the two programs operate asynchronously with variable runtimes, OutputBot and MoverBot communicate about which files are ready to be distributed through a shared database entry…. Read more

Testing in 2021, according to my Twitter bookmarks

My annual roundup of all the things about testing (and working as a programmer more generally) on Twitter that I found interesting enough to bookmark. “A picture is worth a thousand assertions“, quoting Angie Jones from the Test And Code podcast (but remember that all those assertions happen at once without being itemized) Angie Jones… Read more

Gatekeeping in testing

We often talking about gatekeeping in testing as a problem in the sense that testers shouldn’t be the ones that decide when something goes out to production. But “gatekeeping” can also be used in the sense of excluding others. In fan communities you might hear “you aren’t a real Marvel fan if you’ve only seen… Read more

Going deeper on “Should we automate each negative test?”

In recent article on the Ministry of Testing site, Mark Winteringham asks: “Should You Create Automation For Each Negative API Scenario?” In short, he answers that which scenarios you automate will depend entirely on what risks you’re trying to mitigate. While I’m on board with the idea that each test should have a reason behind… Read more