Subscribe to our e-mail newsletters
For more info on a specific newsletter, click the title. Details will be displayed in a new window.
Application/Web Development
Computerworld Daily News (First Look and Wrap-Up)
Computerworld Blogs Newsletter
The Weekly Top 10
More E-Mail Newsletters 
Computerworld 2007Subscribe to Computerworld
40 years of the most authoritative source of news and information for IT leaders.

Smarter Tools, Dumber Developers?

 

Sign up to receive Security Resource Alerts

January 29, 2003 (Computerworld) -- I see a train wreck happening in slow motion. Faster development techniques and technologies are crashing into traditional manual testing approaches. No one seems to understand that just because you can develop faster doesn't mean you can deliver faster. The friction factor is testing.

Look at it this way. If you make any change at all to an application, you run the risk of accidental -- and therefore unanticipated -- breakage. In order to protect operations from potential failure, testing needs to be performed not only for the changes but also all previously existing functionality. So even a 5% development change requires 100% testing.

Do the math. Do you have 20 testers to each developer and 20 times longer to test than develop? I didn't think so.

So you have a choice. Deliver dangerous code fast, or safe code slow? Now, you would think that the obvious answer to this conundrum would be test automation, and you would be right. Only automation can replicate all previous tests while testers add new ones within anything approaching a reasonable time frame. But the glaring reality is that most testing is still done manually because automation is too hard.

And it is probably all your fault. Applications are becoming less and less testable because developers are using less and less discipline. I have seen major, mission-critical Web applications where the pages and objects seem to change names every time you log in -- not that the names were any good to begin with. Button1, text3 and similar names aren't much help, but when they spontaneously become button2 or text2 they are worse than useless -- they are disastrous. When did this swashbuckling approach to programming become OK?


What do we need, training wheels for wayward developers to keep their code stable enough to be tested?



It's like because new tools use wizards, drag-and-drop functionality and other ways of generating code quickly, the code itself is somehow seen as disposable. I've actually had developers argue that it is easier to just throw code away than to fix it. After all, it only took a few hours, days, weeks or whatever to develop, so who cares?
DevTalk
Linda Hayes
Linda Hayes is the CTO of WorkSoft Inc., developer of next-generation test automation solutions. She is the founder of three software companies and holds degrees in accounting, tax and law. A frequent industry speaker and award-winning author on software quality, she pioneered automated testing tools.
Join the online discussion about this column.

Testers, that's who. Disposable code creates disposable tests. To automate a test I have to be able to tell my script how to interact with the application in a way that is repeatable and maintainable. If the application has all the predictability of a dice game, then there is simply no way to ever re-run the same test. Imagine trying to interface to an object where the names of the interfaces, methods and properties all changed often and without warning or meaning. Wouldn't work, would it? But if you can't rerun tests then you can't solve the original dilemma: how to retest previous functionality with the miserly time and resources allocated.

But where I really go off the deep end is when I raise this issue to developers and they say something like "Well that's just the GUI, so it's not that important", or "The HTML code is dynamic anyway, so it doesn't matter what things are called." As though I am focusing on some trivial, cosmetic aspect that doesn't merit the waste of their valuable time and talent.

Excuse me? The middle letter in GUI is User, as in the poor person who paid for the software and has to use it. If the interface to the end user is not important, then what is?

Let me give you a real life example. A major rental car company redesigned their Web GUI for corporate car rentals to adopt a new look and feel. Following the logic that it was just GUI changes and the back end -- where all the real work happened -- was still intact, testing was cursory at best.

But when they rolled it into production, their corporate customers (think 80% of their revenue) could not rent cars at all. They lost revenue in excess of $25 million, received thousands of hate e-mails, and sustained serious if not permanent damage to key customer relations. Why? Because the GUI was redesigned to change how the renter specified whether insurance was wanted; the old option of Y/N was too cryptic for the new look and the drop-down was changed to Accept or Decline. Too bad the database was expecting Y or N. So the hapless user went through the entire effort to enter all required information, only to get to the very last page and receive an error.

There are a million other examples I could regale you with, but suffice it to say that unless developers start building applications with some semblance of discipline, we are all going to pay the price. Testing already takes too long and costs too much, and the only way to deliver increasing functionality within collapsing cycle times is to use automation.

The ultimate irony of all this is that it looks to management as though it is the testers who are bottlenecks, roadblocks or worse. What's wrong with them, anyway? Why does it take them so long when development gets it done so fast? Why can't they get their tests automated? Why are they slowing everything down, are they just lazy or actually stupid? And all the while they are working overtime, tearing their hair out, and puzzling over how a test that ran yesterday won't run today.

So how about it? Can anyone explain to me how tools can get so much smarter and developers get so much dumber? What do we need, training wheels for wayward developers to keep their code stable enough to be tested? Or am I missing something?

Linda Hayes is the CTO of WorkSoft Inc., developer of next-generation test automation solutions. She is the founder of three software companies and holds degrees in accounting, tax and law. A frequent industry speaker and award-winning author on software quality, she pioneered automated testing tools. You can contact her at Linda@worksoft.com or by visiting www.worksoft.com.



Print this Story Send Us Feedback E-mail this Story Digg! Digg this Story Slashdot this Story
Toward Chaos: Is the Decay of Code Inevitable?
You're Not Crazy
Testing in an Organic World
Give Me a Test Hook ¿ or Else
Smarter Tools, Dumber Developers?
Deliver Us From Genius
"IBM's old AS400 technology is fading fast, if product names are any indication...." Read more...
"Systems support pilot fish starts getting reports that a special Y2k tool has stopped working — in early 2008...." Read more...
Read more Development posts or See all Blogs
Microsoft promises four patches next week
Google gives away home-cooked Web application security scanner
Expect iPhone, Fourth of July scams, security firm says
More top stories...
Microsoft trumpets security additions in upcoming IE8
Apple cuts price of high-end SSD MacBook Air by $500
Ultrathin showdown: Apple MacBook Air vs. Lenovo ThinkPad X300 vs. Toshiba Portege R500
All it takes is a couple hours and about $125 to breathe new life into an old laptop. Here's how.
Is Microsoft's Golden Age over? What are Gates' most memorable quotes? Find out in Computerworld's complete coverage of the end of the Bill Gates era at Microsoft.
There are some things your CIO definitely doesn't want to hear. Also don't miss the flipside, Five things you should always tell your boss.
With its latest version, Mozilla's browser continues to raise the bar for what Web browsers should be.
Reviews, analyses, how-tos, visual tours, hot issues and predictions about Microsoft's new OS.
Four years from now, the IT field will be a vastly different place. Will you be ready?
All Zones
Application Performance Zone
Business Continuity Zone
Data Center Management Zone
Enterprise-Class Security Zone
The File Data Management Zone
Grid Computing on Windows Zone
Security Management Zone
ITIL Best Practices Zone
The SAS Zone
Storage Virtualization Zone
Business Intelligence and Analytics Zone

Ads by TechWords

See your link here
Sold on SOA

(Source: Computerworld) It's the hot technology for most large companies, but business, technical and cultural issues must be addressed for a successful SOA implementation. Get the whole story, from the big picture to the how-to-do-it details, in this Executive Bulletin. Download this Executive Bulletin (a $49.95 value) for Free, compliments of Fujitsu.
Download this executive briefing download
Driving Business Success Through Workgroup Choice and Flexibility
Download this white paper, free, compliments of Novell!
(Source: Novell) The structure of your workgroup environment plays a vital role in enabling your knowledge workers to be productive and collaborate securely. And IT choice and flexibility can mean the difference between reactive spending and proactive investment. Boost your competitive advantage with a workgroup infrastructure that lets you deliver the tools and services that are right for you. Download this white paper to learn how Novell offers a variety of solutions that give you the flexibility to address critical business initiatives and workforce productivity.
Download this white paper go
Safeguarding Critical Data
Safeguarding Critical Data
View this on demand webcast, free, compliments of IBM!
Go to the webcast 
White Papers
Read up on the latest ideas and technologies from companies that sell hardware, software and services.
Deploying Virtualized NetWare on Linux Whitepaper
Toward More Flexible, Next-Generation Collaboration Solutions
Driving Business Success Through Workgroup Choice and Flexibility
View more whitepapers