Search Results

Search found 28765 results on 1151 pages for 'software testing'.

Page 103/1151 | < Previous Page | 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110  | Next Page >

• Need help on implementing corporate network security solution and coming up with time lines to test it

  - by abc

  I have to come up with a proposal to implement corporate network security. Once I have done that I also have to come up with estimates on the time / money needed to test (QA) the implementation. What I need help with: What should I keep in mind while coming up with this proposal? I have already considered: Routers, Firewalls, VPN, Wireless, Server System, Web Apps etc. I know I am missing quite a lot. What else should I include? This the most challenging part I feel: How should I estimate the time needed for testing these security implementations? I guess I need to understand how can I test these security implementations first...right? Can you help me?

  Read the article

• Effective versus efficient code

  - by Todd Williamson

  TL;DR: Quick and dirty code, or "correct" (insert your definition of this term) code? There is often a tension between "efficient" and "effective" in software development. "Efficient" often means code that is "correct" from the point of view of adhering to standards, using widely-accepted patterns/approaches for structures, regardless of project size, budget, etc. "Effective" is not about being "right", but about getting things done. This often results in code that falls outside the bounds of commonly accepted "correct" standards, usage, etc. Usually the people paying for the development effort have dictated ahead of time what it is that they value more. An organization that lives in a technical space will tend towards the efficient end, others will tend towards the effective. Developers often refuse to compromise their favored approach for the other. In my own experience I have found that people with formal education in software development tend towards the Efficient camp. Those that picked up software development more or less as a tool to get things done tend towards the Effective camp. These camps don't get along very well. When managing a team of developers who are not all in one camp it is challenging. In your own experience, which camp do you land in, and do you find yourself having to justify your approach to others? To management? To other developers?

  Read the article

• How common is prototyping as the first stage of development?

  - by EpsilonVector

  I've been taking some software design courses in the past few semesters, and while I see the benefit in a lot of the formalism, I still feel like it doesn't tell me anything about the program itself. You can't tell how the program is going to operate from the Use Case spec, even though it discusses what the program can do, and you can't tell anything about the user experience from the requirements document, even though it can include QA requirements. ...sequence diagrams are as good a description of how the software works as the call stack, in other words- very limited, highly partial view of the overall system, and a class diagram is great for describing how the system is built, but is utterly useless in helping you figure out what the software needs to be. Where in all this formalism is the bottom line- how the program looks, operates, and what experience it gives? Doesn't it make more sense to design off of that? Isn't it better to figure out how the program should work via a prototype and strive to implement it for real? I know that I'm probably suffering from being taught engineering by theoreticians, but I got to ask, do they do this in the industry? How do people figure out what the program actually is, not what it should conform to? Do people prototype a lot? ...or do they mostly use the formal tools like UML and I just didn't get the hang of using them yet?

  Read the article

• rails fake data, considering switch from faker to forgery, any advantages or pitfalls?

  - by Michael Durrant

  With Ruby on Rails I've usually used Forgery for generating dummy data for testing. I've noticed recently that several clients and tutorials are using Faker They both seem fairly similar in use and popularity: Faker 128 forks, 418 watchers. Forgery 59 forks, 399 watchers. They both seem similar in how current they are: Faker Most updates are from 6 and 9 months ago. Forgery Most updates are from 4 and 9 months ago. The one distinguishing factor I've found so far is that Forgery seems like it has better instructions. Are there any particular benefits or disadvantages to using one over the other? Have you ever needed to switch from one to another for a particular reason?

  Read the article

• Quality Assurance activities

  - by MasloIed

  Having asked but deleted the question as it was a bit misunderstood. If Quality Control is the actual testing, what are the commonest true quality assurance activities? I have read that verification (reviews, inspections..) but it does not make much sense to me as it looks more like quality control as mentioned here: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ENTERPRISE PERFORMANCE LIFE CYCLE FRAMEWORK Practices guide Verification - “Are we building the product right?” Verification is a quality control technique that is used to evaluate the system or its components to determine whether or not the project’s products satisfy defined requirements. During verification, the project’s processes are reviewed and examined by members of the IV&V team with the goal of preventing omissions, spotting problems, and ensuring the product is being developed correctly. Some Verification activities may include items such as: • Verification of requirement against defined specifications • Verification of design against defined specifications • Verification of product code against defined standards • Verification of terms, conditions, payment, etc., against contracts

  Read the article

• How to make Unit Tests to make sure stored procedure is deleting row from the database?

  - by aspdotnetuser

  I'm new to unit testing and I need some help with the following. I have created a small project to help me learn how to make Unit Tests. The functionality for one of the forms in my application deletes a user from the User table (and other rows in mapping tables). Currently, the unit test I have created to test this sets up the required objects and then calls the business rules method (passing in the user id) which calls the data access method to execute the stored procedure that deletes the rows in the tables. Is this the correct method to test whether something is being deleted successfully? Should the unit test / setup method first insert some test data which the unit test then deletes?

  Read the article

• Examples and Best Practices for Seeding Defects?

  - by MathAttack

  Defect Seeding seems to be one of the few ways a development organization can tell how thorough an independent testing group is. I'm a fan of using metrics to help counter overconfidence biases, and drive discussions around facts. With that said, I haven't seen Seeding Defects used in practice. Are there best practices above and beyond what McConnell explained? Are there public examples where this has been done? In the absence of the above, any thoughts on why it hasn't been done more? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• How does one unit test an algorithm

  - by Asa Baylus

  I was recently working on a JS slideshow which rotates images using a weighted average algorithm. Thankfully, timgilbert has written a weighted list script which implements the exact algorithm I needed. However in his documentation he's noted under todos: "unit tests!". I'd like to know is how one goes about unit testing an algorithm. In the case of a weighted average how would you create a proof that the averages are accurate when there is the element of randomness? Code samples of similar would be very helpful to my understanding.

  Read the article

• How to configure Google Analytics experiments manually

  - by John

  I wish to run multivariate tests on an e-commerce site that run across all product pages. I will be setting and deciding the variations myself all I need to do is track the results in GA. I think may be possible (although only A/B testing is available via the GA UI): https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/platform/features/experiments#serving-framework EXTERNAL – You will choose variations, handle experiment optimization, and only report the chosen variation to Google Analytics. For example, this should be used by 3rd-party optimization platforms that want to integrate with Google Analytics for reporting purposes. In this case, the Google Analytics statistical engine will not run. However how do I configure this and push the data to GA in my page?

  Read the article

• How do you unit test your javascript.

  - by Erin

  I spend a lot of time working in javascript of late. I have not found a way that seems to work well for testing javascript. This in the past hasn't been a problem for me since most of the websites I worked on had very little javascript in them. I now have a new website that makes extensive use of jQuery I would like to build unit tests for most of the system. My problems are this. Most of the functions make changes to the DOM in some way. Most of the functions request data from the web server as well and require a session on the service to get results back. I would like to run the test from either a command line or a test running harness rather then in a browser. Any help or articles I should be reading would be helpful.

  Read the article

• How do you unit test your javascript

  - by Erin

  I spend a lot of time working in javascript of late. I have not found a way that seems to work well for testing javascript. This in the past hasn't been a problem for me since most of the websites I worked on had very little javascript in them. I now have a new website that makes extensive use of jQuery I would like to build unit tests for most of the system. My problems are this. Most of the functions make changes to the DOM in some way. Most of the functions request data from the web server as well and require a session on the service to get results back. I would like to run the test from either a command line or a test running harness rather then in a browser. Any help or articles I should be reading would be helpful.

  Read the article

• How can I test a parser for a bespoke XML schema?

  - by Greg B

  I'm parsing a bespoke XML format into an object graph using .NET 4.0. My parser is using the System.XML namespace internally, I'm then interrogating the relevant properties of XmlNodes to create my object graph. I've got a first cut of the parser working on a basic input file and I want to put some unit tests around this before I progress on to more complex input files. Is there a pattern for how to test a parser such as this? When I started looking at this, my first move was to new up and XmlDocument, XmlNamespaceManager and create an XmlElement. But it occurs to me that this is quite lengthy and prone to human error. My parser is quite recursive as you can imagine and this might lead to testing the full system rather than the individual units (methods) of the system. So a second question might be What refactoring might make a recursive parser more testable?

  Read the article

• Adding unit tests to a legacy, plain C project

  - by Groo

  The title says it all. My company is reusing a legacy firmware project for a microcontroller device, written completely in plain C. There are parts which are obviously wrong and need changing, and coming from a C#/TDD background I don't like the idea of randomly refactoring stuff with no tests to assure us that functionality remains unchanged. Also, I've seen that hard to find bugs were introduced in many occasions through slightest changes (which is something which I believe would be fixed if regression testing was used). A lot of care needs to be taken to avoid these mistakes: it's hard to track a bunch of globals around the code. To summarize: How do you add unit tests to existing tightly coupled code before refactoring? What tools do you recommend? (less important, but still nice to know) I am not directly involved in writing this code (my responsibility is an app which will interact with the device in various ways), but it would be bad if good programming principles were left behind if there was a chance they could be used.

  Read the article

• migrating product and team from startup race to quality development

  - by thevikas

  This is year 3 and product is selling good enough. Now we need to enforce good software development practices. The goal is to monitor incoming bug reports and reduce them, allow never ending features and get ready for scaling 10x. The phrases "test-driven-development" and "continuous-integration" are not even understood by the team cause they were all in the first 2 year product race. Tech team size is 5. The question is how to sell/convince team and management about TDD/unit testing/coding standards/documentation - with economics. train the team to do more than just feature coding and start writing test units along - which looks like more work, means needs more time! how to plan for creating units for all backlog production code

  Read the article

• Is it costly to leave the Console and Script features enabled in Firebug?

  - by parisminton

  For some time now, I've run Firebug constantly enabled to do quick DOM inspections, leaving the Console and Script panels disabled. I'm just starting to use these two features so I don't have to keep using alerts for testing and debugging. I enable them while I use them and turn them back off when I'm done. I'd like to know if these particular features can slow things down such that they shouldn't be left on round-the-clock. Like do they slow down page loads, use inordinate chunks of memory or something? I don't see anything about it in the Firebug wiki.

  Read the article

• How should I describe the process of learning someone else's code? (In an invoicing situation.)

  - by MattyG

  I have a contract to upgrade some in-house software for a large company. The company has requested multiple feature additions and a few bug fixes. This is my first freelance style job. First, I needed to become familiar with how the application worked - I learnt it as if I was a user. Next, I had to learn how the software worked. I started with broad concepts, and then narrowed down into necessary detail before working on each bug fix and feature. At least at the start of the project, it took me a lot longer to learn the existing code than it did to write the additional features. How can I describe the process of learning the existing code on the invoice? (This part of the company usually does things in-house, so doesn't have much experience dealing with software contractors like me, and I fear they may not understand the overhead of learning someone else's code). I don't want to just tack the learning time onto the actual feature upgrade, because in some cases this would make a 'simple task' look like it took me way too long. I want break the invoice into relevant steps, and communicate that I'm charging for the large overhead of learning someone else's code before being able to add my own to it. Is there a standard way of describing this sort of activity when billing for a job?

  Read the article

• How successful is GPL in reaching its goals?

  - by StasM

  There are, broadly, two types of FOSS licenses when it relates to commercial usage of the code - let's say the GPL-type and the BSD-type. The first is, broadly, restrictive about commercial usage (by usage I also mean modification and redistribution, as well as creating derived works, etc.) of the code under the license, and the second is much more permissive. As I understand, the idea behind GPL-type licenses is to encourage people to abandon the proprietary software model and instead convert to the FOSS code, and the license is the instrument to entice them to do so - i.e. "you can use this nice software, but only if you agree to come to our camp and play by our rules". What I want to ask is - was this strategy successful so far? I.e. are there any major achievements in the form of some big project going from closed to open because of GPL or some software being developed in the open only because GPL made it so? How big is the impact of this strategy - compared, say, to the world where everybody would have BSD-type licenses or release all open-source code under public domain? Note that I am not asking if FOSS model is successful - this is beyond question. What I am asking is if the specific way of enticing people to convert from proprietary to FOSS used by GPL-type and not used by BSD-type licenses was successful. I also don't ask about the merits of GPL itself as the license - just about the fact of its effectiveness.

  Read the article

• What open source POSIX compliance test suites are available?

  - by Richard Pennington

  I'm working on a small open source project, ELLCC, that uses clang/LLVM as a cross compiler for various target processors. For the runtime environment, I'm using the NetBSD libraries and porting them to target Linux and standalone systems. I want to run a POSIX compliance test suite on the code. I've found the Open POSIX Test Suite, which looks like a good start, but it hasn't been updated since 2005. I've done some preliminary testing (with gcc and ecc under Linux), and it looks like it needs a few updates for modern compilers. My questions are: Does the Open POSIX Test Suite live on somewhere in a more up to date form? Are there other open source alternatives?

  Read the article

• How do I remove a malformed line from my sources.list?

  - by eminencejae

  I have unistalled and reinstalled the Ubuntu Software Center as per info I found in a similar thread and I got the same response about line 91 or something like that. I just tried to upload a screen shot but since I'm new it won't allow me to. I also can not figure out how to cut and paste anything so I have to hand type what the error screen says, both when I attempt to open the software center and nothing happens, when I try to enter commands into the terminal to uninstall, reinstall, whatever I get the same following: COULD NOT INTITIALIZE THE PACKAGE INFORMATION An unresolvable problem occured while initializing the package information Please report t:his bug against the 'update-manager' package and include the following error message: 'E: Malformed line 91 in source list/etc/apt/sources.list (dist parse) E: The list of sources could not be read., E: The package list of status file could not be parsed or opened. How do I report bugs? What can be done about this. I have searched and everything everyone says to do leads me back to the same line error message. So, I don't know how to get to line 91 in the source list; to tell you what it says. Sorry, I'm really new to this. That is what I need is to find out how to get there and fix what it says. I would really like to NOT have to re partition my hard drive and start from scratch, so I'm really looking forward to getting this problem solved. I need to be able to install new software.

  Read the article

• ISO 12207: SQA as a supporting process?

  - by user970696

  I have been following ISO12207 for the sake of my thesis dealing with software quality. Now I should explain quality assurance and here comes the problem: according to this norm, QA is a supporting process, separated but on the same level with verification, validation and auditing processes. According to other sources, Quality Assurance is basically high level activity making sure that standards, norms etc. are being followed. Usually the part of Quality Assurance is the Quality Control (testing, reviewing, inspections also V&V) which measures the quality and provides QA with this information so it can be acted upon. I somehow do not understand how QA is thought to be according to this ISO and what activities should it perform. Also it does not mention QC except for a footnote.

  Read the article

• What is the best unit test framework for .NET and why?

  - by rmx

  It seems to me that everyone uses NUnit without even considering the other options. I think this is because: Everyone is familiar with it already so they won't have to learn a new API. It is already set up with their continuous integration server to work with NUnit. Am I wrong about this? I decided to use xUnit on one of my own projects recently and I love it! It makes so much more sense to me and conceptually it seems like a definite step forward from NUnit. I'd like to hear opinions on which framework is actually the best - not taking into consideration having to learn it or reconfigure your automated testing.

  Read the article

• Distributing a very simple application

  - by vanna

  I have a very simple working console application written in C++ linked with a light static library. It is just for testing purposes. Now that the coding part is done, I would like to know the process of actually distributing the program. I wrote a very basic CMakeLists.txt that create makefiles or VS projects to build the sources. I also have a program that calls the static library in order to make some google tests. To me, the distribution of this application goes like this : to developpers : the src directory with the CMakeLists.txt file (multi-platform distribution) with a README.txt and an INSTALL.txt to users : the executable and a README.txt on my git repo : everything mentionned above plus the sources for testing and the gtest external lib A this point : considering the complexity of my application, am I doing it right ? Is there any reference that would formalize this distribution process so I can get better and go further ? Say I would like to add dynamic libraries that can be updated, external libraries like boost : how should I package this to distribute it in a professionnal way ?

  Read the article

• test coverage reality

  - by iPhoneDeveloper

  I am NOT doing test driven development and I write my test classes after the actual code is written. In my current project I have a test coverage of(Line coverage) %70 for 3000 lines of Java code.(Using JUnit, Mockito and Sonar for testing) But while I feel actually I am not covering and catching %70 of the problems that can occur. So my question is in theory is that possible to have a %100 Line coverage but in reality it is meaningless because of low quality of the test code and maybe a %40 well written test code is much better than a bad %100 coverage? or we can always say line coverage more or less gives the percentage of all covered issues?

  Read the article

• Must all new features go through betatest?

  - by LTR

  Obviously, small usability fixes and bugfixes go directly into the stable product. What about small new features? Can you afford to just release them after internal testing, or do they have to be betatested by customers first? Situation: This is a young commercial project, produced by a one-person company. It has an existing userbase and is at it's second major version. Previous betatests have produced some results, however most feedback came from the stable product and not from beta versions.

  Read the article

• Are my other partitions safe from harm from an alpha/beta release?

  - by Marcappuccino

  I am quite intrested in testing the latest alpha-3 of Ubuntu, however, performance in VirtualBox is slow and somewhat buggy (I know! It's an Alpha) - guest additions wern't installing, bad mouse intergration, etc. I would now like to test this release on my hard drive. But my main system (12.04) is also on this very same hard drive. Is this safe? Can the alpha touch my main partition? Are there any other risks?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110  | Next Page >