Tom Ball wrote:
.....
So what's the problem with unit testing? Unit tests are not tests, but rather a developer's safety net. QA doesn't own unit testing, developers do, and it's an important tool to be shared with your fellow developers on any project. Rename this engineering best practice, and it will be perfect.
....
twosuns commented:
....
Programmer testing should be restricted to the most risky parts of the code, code you don't feel quite comfortable with. Those parts you write specific test cases against and write until the code passes those test cases. Of course no software should leave your hands that doesn't run and crashes in standard use. But IMO it's not the task of the programmer (initially) to take the job of the QA team and do exhaustive testing of every possible scenario.
....
.....
So what's the problem with unit testing? Unit tests are not tests, but rather a developer's safety net. QA doesn't own unit testing, developers do, and it's an important tool to be shared with your fellow developers on any project. Rename this engineering best practice, and it will be perfect.
....
twosuns commented:
....
Programmer testing should be restricted to the most risky parts of the code, code you don't feel quite comfortable with. Those parts you write specific test cases against and write until the code passes those test cases. Of course no software should leave your hands that doesn't run and crashes in standard use. But IMO it's not the task of the programmer (initially) to take the job of the QA team and do exhaustive testing of every possible scenario.
....