Search Results

Search found 3308 results on 133 pages for 'quality assurance'.

Page 15/133 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • How to apply verification and validation on the following example

    - by user970696
    I have been following verification and validation questions here with my colleagues, yet we are unable to see the slight differences, probably caused by language barrier in technical English. An example: Requirement specification User wants to control the lights in 4 rooms by remote command sent from the UI for each room separately. Functional specification The UI will contain 4 checkboxes labelled according to rooms they control. When a checkbox is checked, the signal is sent to corresponding light. A green dot appears next to the checkbox When a checkbox is unchecked, the signal (turn off) is sent to corresponding light. A red dot appears next to the checkbox. Let me start with what I learned here: Verification, according to many great answers here, ensures that product reflects specified requirements - as functional spec is done by a producer based on requirements from customer, this one will be verified for completeness, correctness). Then design document will be checked against functional spec (it should design 4 checkboxes..), and the source code against design (is there a code for 4 checkboxes, functions to send the signals etc. - is it traceable to requirements). Okay, product is built and we need to test it, validate. Here comes our understanding trouble - validation should ensure the product meets requirements for its specific intended use which is basically business requirement (does it work? can I control the lights from the UI?) but testers will definitely work with the functional spec, making sure the checkboxes are there, working, labelled, etc. They are basically checking whether the requirements in functional spec were met in the final product, isn't that verification? (should not be, lets stick to ISO 12207 that only validation is the actual testing)

    Read the article

  • General List of Common Programming Errors

    - by javamonkey79
    As one journey's from apprentice to journeyman to master I've noticed that one accumulates a list of best practices for things they've been bitten by. Personally, I write most of my stuff in java & SQL so my list tends to be slated towards them. I've accumulated the following: When doing list removal, always reverse iterate Avoid adding items to a list you are currently iterating on Watch out for NullPointerExceptions Now, I know there are language specific "common errors" links out there like this one. And I'm also aware of the pragmatic programmer tips, Martin Fowler's "code smells". Does anyone know of any good lists out there of things like I've listed above (re: list removal, adding items, etc). My guess is that there are some good QA folks out there that can probably throw me a bone here. I'm not looking for things the compiler can catch - I'm looking for common things that cause bugs. In the event that there isn't a list out there already then I welcome posting your own findings here. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Inspection, code review - is it really testing?

    - by user970696
    ISTQB, Wikipedia or other sources classify verification acitivities (reviews etc.) as a static testing, yet other do not. If we can say that peer reviews and inspections are actually a kind of a testing, then a lot of standards do not make sense (consider e.g. ISO which say that validation is done by testing, while verification by checking of work products) - it should at least say dynamic testing for validation, shouldn't it? I am completing master thesis dealing with QA and I must admit that I have never seen worse and more ambiguous and contradicting literature than in this field :/ Do you think (and if so, why) that static testing is a good and justifiable term or should we stick to testing and static checks/analysis?

    Read the article

  • How to examine the speed of your code results?

    - by Goma
    Hi. Whatever was your choice PHP, ASP.NET, Ruby On Rails or even JSP. You know that you can develop a website to give a specific result or to do some tasks in many ways. I mean you can change your code to make it shorter (or for any other reason) but to give the same result. In this case how do you test which code was faster to excute so you choose it to make your website faster? I mean do you have any tools or ideas in how to test the time of execution for your code and compare it with time of execution after you do some edit?

    Read the article

  • What is logical cohesion, and why is it bad or undesirable?

    - by Matt Fenwick
    From the c2wiki page on coupling & cohesion: Cohesion (interdependency within module) strength/level names : (from worse to better, high cohesion is good) Coincidental Cohesion : (Worst) Module elements are unrelated Logical Cohesion : Elements perform similar activities as selected from outside module, i.e. by a flag that selects operation to perform (see also CommandObject). i.e. body of function is one huge if-else/switch on operation flag Temporal Cohesion : operations related only by general time performed (i.e. initialization() or FatalErrorShutdown?()) Procedural Cohesion : Elements involved in different but sequential activities, each on different data (usually could be trivially split into multiple modules along linear sequence boundaries) Communicational Cohesion : unrelated operations except need same data or input Sequential Cohesion : operations on same data in significant order; output from one function is input to next (pipeline) Informational Cohesion: a module performs a number of actions, each with its own entry point, with independent code for each action, all performed on the same data structure. Essentially an implementation of an abstract data type. i.e. define structure of sales_region_table and its operators: init_table(), update_table(), print_table() Functional Cohesion : all elements contribute to a single, well-defined task, i.e. a function that performs exactly one operation get_engine_temperature(), add_sales_tax() (emphasis mine). I don't fully understand the definition of logical cohesion. My questions are: what is logical cohesion? Why does it get such a bad rap (2nd worst kind of cohesion)?

    Read the article

  • How to justify rewriting/revamping legacy software in a business case?

    - by sxthomson
    I work for a great little software company which makes good revenue from our main software package. The problem for me is that it's almost unmaintainable. It's written in Delphi 7 (has upgraded versions over time) and has been worked on by a lot of developers over the past 20 or so years. The software lacks any meaningful architecture - there's no object orientation whatsoever, horrible amounts of cyclical dependencies and an over-reliance on global variables to name just a few things. Another huge thing for me is Delphi 7 does NOT support 64-bit. The problem here for me is that my management team don't care about technical things, they want to know why they should care. Obviously that's expected, so what I'm asking here is for some guidance, or tales, or pitfalls about this kind of thing. There's a few things I would love to include, namely for me, the length of time taken to debug/write a feature in "legacy" code, versus coherent, well structured OO code. Does anyone know of any blog posts or the like where this is talked about? For us in the company this is a huge reason. Despite being decent developers we feel like writing a new feature is just piling more rubbish on top. On top of that, even for me who has a decent level of understanding of the code, changing things is infuriating - a small change can have a ridiculous domino effect. Anyone have any experiences they'd like to share?

    Read the article

  • What do you think about RefactoringManifesto.org?

    - by Gan
    Quite some time ago, on December 19 2010, a site called RefactoringManifesto.org was launched. The site is to voice concerns about refactoring. It lists ten main points as shown below (head over the website to see more details): Make your products live longer! Design should be simple so that it is easy to refactor. Refactoring is not rewriting. What doesn't kill it makes it stronger. Refactoring is a creative challenge. Refactoring survives fashion. To refactor is to discover. Refactoring is about independence. You can refactor anything, even total crap. Refactor – even in bad times! What do you think about this? Would you sign the manifesto? If not, why?

    Read the article

  • C: What is a good source to teach standard/basic code conventions to someone newly learning the language?

    - by shan23
    I'm tutoring someone who can be described as a rank newcomer in C. Understandably, she does not know much about coding conventions generally practiced, and hence all her programs tend to use single letter vars, mismatched spacing/indentation and the like, making it very difficult to read/debug her endeavors. My question is, is there a link/set of guidelines and examples which she can use for adopting basic code conventions ? It should not be too arcane as to scare her off, yet inclusive enough to have the basics covered (so that no one woulc wince looking at the code). Any suggestions ?

    Read the article

  • Entry level engineer question regarding memory mangement

    - by Ealianis
    It has been a few months since I started my position as an entry level software developer. Now that I am past some learning curves (e.g. the language, jargon, syntax of VB and C#) I'm starting to focus on more esoteric topics, as to write better software. A simple question I presented to a fellow coworker was responded with "I'm focusing on the wrong things." While I respect this coworker I do disagree that this is a "wrong thing" to focus upon. Here was the code (in VB) and followed by the question. Note: The Function GenerateAlert() returns an integer. Dim alertID as Integer = GenerateAlert() _errorDictionary.Add(argErrorID, NewErrorInfo(Now(), alertID)) vs... _errorDictionary.Add(argErrorID, New ErrorInfo(Now(), GenerateAlert())) I originally wrote the ladder and rewrote it with the "Dim alertID" so that someone else might find it easier to read. But here was my concern and question. "Should one write this with the Dim AlertID, it would in fact take up more memory; finite but more, and should this method be called many times could it lead to an issue? How will .NET handle this object AlertID. Outside of .NET should one manually dispose of the object after use (near the end of the sub)." I want to ensure I become a knowledgeable programmer that does not just rely upon garbage collection. Am I over thinking this? Am I focusing on the wrong things?

    Read the article

  • What should NOT be included in comments? (opinion on a dictum by the inventor of Forth)

    - by AKE
    The often provocative Chuck Moore (inventor of the Forth language) gave the following advice (paraphrasing): "Use comments sparingly. Programs are self-documenting, with a modicum of help from mnemonics. Comments should say WHAT the program is doing, not HOW." My question: Should comments say WHY the program is doing what it is doing? Update: In addition to the answers below, these two provide additional insight. 1: Beginner's guide to writing comments? 2: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/98609/62203

    Read the article

  • How do you QA and release software quickly with a large team?

    - by sadadasd
    My work used to be a smaller team. We had less than 13 devs for a while. We are now growing rapidly, and are over 20 with plans to be over 30 in a few months. Our process for QA'ing and releasing each build is no longer working. We currently have everyone develop the new code, and stick it onto a staging environment. A few days before our weekly release, we would freeze the staging environment and QA everything. By our normal release time, everything was usually deemed acceptable and pushed out the door to the main site. We reached a point where our code got too big so we could no longer regress the entire site each week in QA. We were ok with that, we just made a list of everything important and only covered that and the new stuff. Now we are reaching a point where all the new stuff each week is becoming too big and too unstable. Our staging environment is really buggy week after week, and we are usually 1-2 hours behind the normal release time. As the team is growing further, we are going to drown with this same process. We are re-evaluating everything, and I personally am looking for suggestions / success stories. Many companies have been where before and progressed beyond, we need to do the same

    Read the article

  • Software architecture for two similar classes which require different input parameters for the same method

    - by I Like to Code
    I am writing code to simulate a supply chain. The supply chain can be simulated in either an intermediate stocking or a cross-docking configuration. So, I wrote two simulator objects IstockSimulator and XdockSimulator. Since the two objects share certain behaviors (e.g. making shipments, demand arriving), I wrote an abstract simulator object AbstractSimulator which is a parent class of the two simulator objects. The abstract simulator object has a method runSimulation() which takes an input parameter of class SimulationParameters. Up till now, the simulation parameters only contains fields that are common to both simulator objects, such as randomSeed, simulationStartPeriod and simulationEndPeriod. However, I now want to include fields that are specific to the type of simulation that is being run, i.e. an IstockSimulationParameters class for an intermediate stocking simulation, and a XdockSimulationParameters class for a cross-docking simulation. My current idea is take the method runSimulation() out of the AbstractSimulator class, but to put a runSimulation(IstockSimulationParameters) method in the IstockSimulator class, and a runSimulation(XdockSimulationParameters) method in the IstockSimulator class. I am worried however, that this approach will lead to code duplication. What should I do?

    Read the article

  • Prefer class members or passing arguments between internal methods?

    - by geoffjentry
    Suppose within the private portion of a class there is a value which is utilized by multiple private methods. Do people prefer having this defined as a member variable for the class or passing it as an argument to each of the methods - and why? On one hand I could see an argument to be made that reducing state (ie member variables) in a class is generally a good thing, although if the same value is being repeatedly used throughout a class' methods it seems like that would be an ideal candidate for representation as state for the class to make the code visibly cleaner if nothing else. Edit: To clarify some of the comments/questions that were raised, I'm not talking about constants and this isn't relating to any particular case rather just a hypothetical that I was talking to some other people about. Ignoring the OOP angle for a moment, the particular use case that I had in mind was the following (assume pass by reference just to make the pseudocode cleaner) int x doSomething(x) doAnotherThing(x) doYetAnotherThing(x) doSomethingElse(x) So what I mean is that there's some variable that is common between multiple functions - in the case I had in mind it was due to chaining of smaller functions. In an OOP system, if these were all methods of a class (say due to refactoring via extracting methods from a large method), that variable could be passed around them all or it could be a class member.

    Read the article

  • What's wrong with circular references?

    - by dash-tom-bang
    I was involved in a programming discussion today where I made some statements that basically assumed axiomatically that circular references (between modules, classes, whatever) are generally bad. Once I got through with my pitch, my coworker asked, "what's wrong with circular references?" I've got strong feelings on this, but it's hard for me to verbalize concisely and concretely. Any explanation that I may come up with tends to rely on other items that I too consider axioms ("can't use in isolation, so can't test", "unknown/undefined behavior as state mutates in the participating objects", etc.), but I'd love to hear a concise reason for why circular references are bad that don't take the kinds of leaps of faith that my own brain does, having spent many hours over the years untangling them to understand, fix, and extend various bits of code. Edit: I am not asking about homogenous circular references, like those in a doubly-linked list or pointer-to-parent. This question is really asking about "larger scope" circular references, like libA calling libB which calls back to libA. Substitute 'module' for 'lib' if you like. Thanks for all of the answers so far!

    Read the article

  • Is there such a thing as having too many private functions/methods?

    - by shovonr
    I understand the importance of well documented code. But I also understand the importance of self-documenting code. The easier it is to visually read a particular function, the faster we can move on during software maintenance. With that said, I like to separate big functions into other smaller ones. But I do so to a point where a class can have upwards of five of them just to serve one public method. Now multiply five private methods by five public ones, and you get around twenty-five hidden methods that are probably going to be called only once by those public ones. Sure, it's now easier to read those public methods, but I can't help but think that having too many functions is bad practice.

    Read the article

  • How to verify the code that could take a substantial time to compile? [on hold]

    - by user18404
    As a follow up to my prev question: What is the best aproach for coding in a slow compilation environment To recap: I am stuck with a large software system with which a TDD ideology of "test often" does not work. And to make it even worse the features like pre-compiled headers/multi-threaded compilation/incremental linking, etc is not available to me - hence I think that the best way out would be to add the extensive logging into the system and to start "coding in large chunks", which I understand as code for a two-three hours first (as opposed to 15-20 mins in TDD) - thoroughly eyeball the code for a 15 minutes and only after all that do the compilation and run the tests. As I have been doing TDD for a quite a while, my code eyeballing / code verification skills got rusty (you don't really need this that much if you can quickly verify what you've done in 5 seconds by running a test or two) - so I am after a recommendations on how to learn these source code verification/error spotting skills again. I know I was able to do that easily some 5-10 years ago when I din't have much support from the compiler/unit testing tools I had until recently, thus there should be a way to get back to the basics.

    Read the article

  • Would there be any reason not to use github (or any open source hosting site) for my code?

    - by Jetti
    So I just created my first github repo and started to wonder if there would be any reason why somebody shouldn't post their code. I don't mean the obvious, such as code that is IP of somebody else or any other possible legal situation; I'm talking about a newbie posting their own, albeit terrible, code. I've heard several times on this site that one of the things that a some of the hiring managers do is check out the person on Github (or similar site), so what if the code is lacking? Would the position desired matter? (ex Junior Developer vs Senior)?

    Read the article

  • Are there architecture smells?

    - by C. Ross
    There are tons of resources on the web referring to and listing code smells. However, I've never seen information on architectural smells. Is this defined somewhere, and is there a list available? Has any formal research been done into architecture defects, and their impact on project speed, defects, and the like? Edit: I wasn't really looking for a list in the answers, but documentation (on the web or in a book) about architecture smells.

    Read the article

  • Do ALL your variables need to be declared private? [closed]

    - by skizeey
    Possible Duplicate: Why do we need private variables? I know that it's best practice to stay safe, and that we should always prevent others from directly accessing a class' properties. I hear this all the time from university professors, and I also see this all the time in a lot of source code released on the App Hub. In fact, professors say that they will actually take marks off for every variable that gets declared public. Now, this leaves me always declaring variables as private. No matter what. Even if each of these variables were to have both a getter and a setter. But here's the problem: it's tedious work. I tend to quickly lose interest in a project every time I need to have a variable in a class that could have simply been declared public instead of private with a getter and a setter. So my question is, do I really need to declare all my variables private? Or could I declare some variables public whenever they require both a getter and a setter?

    Read the article

  • Store image as logic file (in db by using binary format) or physical file (in the server)

    - by Michel Ayres
    In those study cases of image storage, An image that change only once in a while, if it changes at all (like an image for an article) The image case from above is not only one image but over 10, that link to the same article An image that have changes very often (like a banner image for a website) The image above is huge What is the best approach for each case? What is the "right/faster" way to do this task in each scenario ?

    Read the article

  • Are there architecture smells?

    - by C. Ross
    There are tons of resources on the web referring to and listing code smells. However, I've never seen information on architectural smells. Is this defined somewhere, and is there a list available? Has any formal research been done into architecture defects, and their impact on project speed, defects, and the like? Edit: I wasn't really looking for a list in the answers, but documentation (on the web or in a book) about architecture smells.

    Read the article

  • Entry level engineer question regarding memory management

    - by Ealianis
    It has been a few months since I started my position as an entry level software developer. Now that I am past some learning curves (e.g. the language, jargon, syntax of VB and C#) I'm starting to focus on more esoteric topics, as to write better software. A simple question I presented to a fellow coworker was responded with "I'm focusing on the wrong things." While I respect this coworker I do disagree that this is a "wrong thing" to focus upon. Here was the code (in VB) and followed by the question. Note: The Function GenerateAlert() returns an integer. Dim alertID as Integer = GenerateAlert() _errorDictionary.Add(argErrorID, NewErrorInfo(Now(), alertID)) vs... _errorDictionary.Add(argErrorID, New ErrorInfo(Now(), GenerateAlert())) I originally wrote the latter and rewrote it with the "Dim alertID" so that someone else might find it easier to read. But here was my concern and question: Should one write this with the Dim AlertID, it would in fact take up more memory; finite but more, and should this method be called many times could it lead to an issue? How will .NET handle this object AlertID. Outside of .NET should one manually dispose of the object after use (near the end of the sub). I want to ensure I become a knowledgeable programmer that does not just rely upon garbage collection. Am I over thinking this? Am I focusing on the wrong things?

    Read the article

  • how to serialize function depending on what instance of object calls it, if same instance call in a thread then do serialize else not

    - by LondonDreams
    I have a function which fetches and updates some record from db and I am trying to make sure each if the function is called by same instance of object(same Or different thread) then function should behave synchronized else its a call from different object instance function need not to be synchronized. I have tried it use a lock per client. That is, instead of synchronizing the method directly using explicit locking through lock objects using Map. function is like :- getAndUpdateMyHitCount(myObjId){ //go to db and get unique record by myObjId //fetch value , increment , save update } And this function may get call is same thread by different Or same object instance But as fetching and matching from Map is slow , Is there other optimized way to do this ? Found similar at this Question but dont feel that is optimized

    Read the article

  • What is the effect of creating unit tests during development on time to develop as well as time spent in maintenance activities?

    - by jgauffin
    I'm a consultant and I am going to introduce unit tests to all developers at my client site. My goal is to ensure that all new applications should have unit tests for all classes created. The client has a problem with high maintenance costs from fixing bugs in their existing applications. Their applications have a life span from between 5-15 years in which they continuously add new features. I'm quite confident that they will benefit greatly from starting with unit tests. I'm interested in the effect of unit tests on the time and cost of development: How much time will writing unit tests as part of the development process add? How much time will be saved in maintenance activities (testing and debugging) by having good unit tests?

    Read the article

  • Do ALL your variables need to be declared private?

    - by shovonr
    I know that it's best practice to stay safe, and that we should always prevent others from directly accessing a class' properties. I hear this all the time from university professors, and I also see this all the time in a lot of source code released on the App Hub. In fact, professors say that they will actually take marks off for every variable that gets declared public. Now, this leaves me always declaring variables as private. No matter what. Even if each of these variables were to have both a getter and a setter. But here's the problem: it's tedious work. I tend to quickly loose interest in a project every time I need to have a variable in a class that could have simply been declared public instead of private with a getter and a setter. So my question is, do I really need to declare all my variables private? Or could I declare some variables public whenever they require both a getter and a setter?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >