Bugs happen. Totally preventing bug is not possible.

But it is potential to manage bugs with the assistant of package testing. The goal of any software system is to have an automated testing strategy in place that allows all bugs to be identified and fixed before they are released into production.

If you have been pursuing that end, but are still falling little of preventing bugs in production, it might be time to reevaluate your testing strategy. This article identifies common reasons why your testing operation may not be as efficient at catching bug as you ’ d like.

Reason 1 - Eminent Coverage Doesn ’ t Always Equal Well-Tested Code

Code coverage metrics are frequently employ to measure how well-tested an organization ’ s code is. And having eminent test reportage prosody is a worthy goal for any organization. I was recently impressed when a new developer on my squad increased the code coverage on a project by over 25 %. That find quickly vanished when another engineer pointed out that none of the new trial instance validated expected outcomes, and we had a productive team discussion on the difference between covering codification and testing code.

Code coverage is a useful metricif you mate it with mutation testing, guarantee that tryout reportage is both effective and thorough.

Reason 2 - Coding Standards Don ’ t Eliminate Problems

Coding standards help ensure that all engineers on a project create code which uses a similar style and formatting. Standards improve readability of code, the creation of code revaluation, bug fixing, and overall alimony easier for developers.

Code standards by themselves won ’ t reduce your bug count, but they do aid ensure that your projection maintenance is more straightforward when bugs occur.

Reason 3 - You View Development and Bug Fixing as Separate Activities

When we think of combining steganography and examination, often, the result is that the development team will take a break from development activities and pass a few hours feverishly prove the application and finding as many bugs as they can. A roseola of bug fixing follow, and so the team returns to regular coding activities.

This approach may temporarily uncover bugs and make a dip in the number of shortcoming in the codification, but it won ’ t experience a marked result on the ontogenesis of high-quality source code for the long condition.

Pro tip: Tools like SUSA can handle this autonomously — upload your app and get results without writing a single test script.

Reason 4 - Code Reviews are Great If Time Permits

Code reviews are one of the most effective ways to secure that your team is make code which meet requirements and mitigates potential problems. Unfortunately, when deadlines approach and stakeholders are getting nervous, the code review seem to be the first casualty of war.

Reason 5 - The Focus Is On Adding New Features

If you asked an engineering team for a show of hands on who would like to acquire new functionality and who would like to refactor existing code and improve it, you probably already know what the results will be. Engineers like the allure of new frontiers, rather than wading through someone else ’ s code. Teams which strike a balance between new development and maintenance of existing codification will see benefits in both the maintainability of be codification and the number of bugs contained therein.

Refactoring code also encourages engineers to think about pen unit tests in such a style as to support these activity and insure that optimisation travail don ’ t break core functionality.

Reason 6 - You ’ re Relying On Traditional Testing Models

As an engineer, I used to believe that the most worthful individual I could have on my team was a diligent and conscientious QA engineer. The reality is that this image resulted in me give less attention to the quality of the code because my QA person would bump any misapprehension.

Integrating QA and Development activities advance technologist to opine through their solutions thoroughly and regard trial example as part of the merchandise. Integration fosters a sense of possession among engineers as well, create a transition from an “ engineering vs. character problem ” to “ our problem. ”

Reason 7 - You Haven ’ t Automated Your Testing Yet

We just verbalise about the problems with traditional testing. Once you ’ ve compound the processes of developing and testing, you need to facilitate the automation of all essay action and execute your machine-controlled test suite as oft as possible. Foster an environment where the full test rooms can be fulfil:

• Before any code is checked into a repository.

• Anytime codification is merged into your master branch.

• Whenever your code is establish and deployed.

Finally, enable testing against your production environment. Thorough and automated test suites will catch a lot of bugs before they reach production, but you want to make certain that your product environment continues to operate optimally and remains uncommitted for all consumers.

Conclusion: Developing an Effective Test Strategy

A genuinely effectual test strategy becomes part of the development culture in your organization. Engineers should be enabled with the tools to effectively test their solutions and should be encouraged to automate testing wherever possible. Fostering a culture of possession and continuous improvement will yield exponential dividend in your quest to reduce your bug count.

Mike Mackrory is a global citizen who has adjudicate down in the Pacific Northwest - for now. By day he act as a Senior Engineer on a Quality Engineering team and by dark he writes, consults on various web free-base project and pass a marginally successful eBay spikelet business. When he ’ s not tapping on the keys, he can be found hiking, sportfishing and exploring both the urban and the rural landscape with his tyke. Always happy to assist out another developer, he has a definite predilection for helping those who bring endowment of epicure doughnut, craft beer and/or single-malt Scotch.