Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
Richard Erlacher
07/17/05 23:45
Read: 1128 times
Denver, Co
USA


 
#97535 - definintions?
Responding to: Jan Waclawek's previous message
When many of us speak of "testing" we mean acceptance testing, i.e. certification that a system is ready for delivery to the one who's paying for it. If under any circumstances specified in the test plan, it is possible to cause a malfunction under "testing," then it is necessary that the device behave in a prespecified manner. I it fails to do that, then it isn't ready for delivery.

I think what Jan refers to in his remarks is what we casually refer to as "smoke-testing," namely applying power to see what happens ... seldom advisable unless you already know what will happen. You only do that if you already know that all the interconnections are correct and that there are no "gratuitous" connections. You already know what the software "should" do, based on extensive study and simulation. You already know what the conditions to which the system under study is exposed, so you know what it will do. If it fails to do that, you've made an error.

When you're "testing," you have a system that has already been thoroughly exercised at all the prespecified stresses and under all the prespecified operating conditions. You've operated the system under worst-case conditions for extended periods, and you've verified that it behaves exactly as specified in the design documents. Now you have to prove that THIS unit behaves exactly as the others, deemed to work properly, behave under the same conditions. Software bugs are not a factor in testing. They're only a factor during the debugging phase, very early in the development cycle. Testing is the LAST thing before the system is packaged for shipment to the customer.

Debugging is in the first 5% of the work on the physical hardware. Testing is the last part, and often the longest.

RE

List of 105 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
disciplined clear process for debugging        Payam Soltany      07/04/05 21:41      
   Use a scope!      Andy Neil      07/05/05 00:06      
   Design for debug      Andy Neil      07/05/05 01:00      
      comments      Erik Malund      07/05/05 06:59      
         Comments on comments      Andy Neil      07/05/05 12:27      
            In the eyes of the beholder      Erik Malund      07/05/05 12:35      
               budget      Andy Neil      07/05/05 14:46      
                  budget      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 06:27      
                     that is when it will be needed      Erik Malund      07/11/05 06:44      
                        unless...      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 07:12      
                           you do not get the point      Erik Malund      07/11/05 07:18      
                              shoud I?      Jan Waclawek      07/11/05 07:30      
                              Yes.      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 08:14      
                                 inconsequent      Erik Malund      07/11/05 08:28      
                                    no, no, no...      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 10:49      
                                       then why      Erik Malund      07/11/05 10:56      
                                          ...which means...      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 11:13      
                                             which you must verify which is more work      Erik Malund      07/11/05 11:27      
                                                Coding style...      Bartosz Wucke      07/12/05 01:00      
                                                   that's impossible      Erik Malund      07/12/05 06:09      
               9 out of 10 cats prefer it      Donald Catto      07/06/05 02:46      
                  corrections      Erik Malund      07/06/05 06:26      
                     Experience, not correction.      Donald Catto      07/06/05 07:26      
                        I'm curious      Erik Malund      07/06/05 07:35      
                           no ICE      James Hinnant      07/06/05 20:04      
         I like Serial Debugging      Neil Kurzman      07/05/05 12:50      
         re:ice      Jacob Boyce      07/06/05 12:25      
            Don't put the bugs in!      Russell Bull      07/07/05 02:27      
               your brain is your best debugger      Jacob Boyce      07/07/05 07:15      
                  not always so      Erik Malund      07/07/05 07:29      
                     blindness      Jan Waclawek      07/07/05 08:01      
                        Tell it to the gatepost      Andy Neil      07/07/05 08:18      
                           are you calling      Erik Malund      07/07/05 08:40      
                           Simpler help.      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 06:52      
                              clerical errors      Erik Malund      07/11/05 07:10      
                                 Re:      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 07:33      
                                    when quoting, be complete      Erik Malund      07/11/05 07:37      
                        re:blindness      Jacob Boyce      07/07/05 08:51      
                           testing      Jan Waclawek      07/07/05 09:04      
                              debugging is NOT testing      Richard Erlacher      07/12/05 07:25      
                                 not according to NASA      Erik Malund      07/12/05 08:23      
                                    What?      Richard Erlacher      07/17/05 23:55      
                                       unnecessary code      Erik Malund      07/18/05 06:26      
                                       read all about it      Erik Malund      07/18/05 06:32      
                                          that's the difference ...      Richard Erlacher      07/18/05 22:47      
                                             I agree with NASA, you do not      Erik Malund      07/19/05 06:09      
                                 terminology      Jan Waclawek      07/12/05 09:36      
                                    definintions?      Richard Erlacher      07/17/05 23:45      
                           when designing devices that can harm lif      Erik Malund      07/07/05 09:50      
                              re:don't do harm      Jacob Boyce      07/07/05 12:13      
                                 another article of interest      Jacob Boyce      07/07/05 12:52      
                  WYWIWYS      Andy Neil      07/07/05 08:11      
                     An old programmer's law        Slobodan Mandaric      07/11/05 03:26      
                        An Old Programmer's response      Andy Neil      07/11/05 03:48      
                           perfect communication      Erik Malund      07/11/05 06:46      
   hmmmm      Jez Smith      07/05/05 02:04      
      Learning.      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 07:19      
      Sorry Mr. Professional      Payam Soltany      07/11/05 18:48      
         don't read if they are boring      Erik Malund      07/12/05 06:12      
            Allright      Payam Soltany      07/12/05 07:12      
               as I said      Erik Malund      07/12/05 07:14      
   Thanks Payam!      Mehdi      07/05/05 02:08      
      Don't let Erik see that!      Andy Neil      07/05/05 05:09      
         Bad engineering      Donald Catto      07/06/05 02:35      
            I don't think it is bad engineering!      Mehdi      07/06/05 03:07      
               Calm down - it's only a joke!      Andy Neil      07/06/05 03:41      
                  Yes and no      Donald Catto      07/06/05 05:22      
                     Testing      Steve M. Taylor      07/06/05 06:06      
                        succesful testing does not prove the abs      Erik Malund      07/06/05 06:39      
                           The proof is in the pudding      Donald Catto      07/06/05 07:12      
                              you can't      Erik Malund      07/06/05 07:42      
                              Proving      Andy Neil      07/06/05 11:43      
                           successful testing!      Mehdi      07/06/05 10:01      
                           Bad testing      Andy Neil      07/06/05 11:49      
                              bad, maybe, but possibly complete      Erik Malund      07/06/05 11:57      
                                 Perfect vs Good Enough.      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 08:14      
                                    the slippery slope      Erik Malund      07/11/05 08:37      
                                       90% agreement.      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 11:05      
                                          then why do you discuss releasing progra      Erik Malund      07/11/05 11:16      
                                             I don't "release".      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 11:48      
                                                Is repeating part of the question an ans      Erik Malund      07/11/05 12:09      
                                                   Yes.      Bartosz Wucke      07/12/05 00:34      
                                                      not authority but knowledge      Erik Malund      07/12/05 06:18      
                                                         Where...?      Bartosz Wucke      07/12/05 12:08      
                                                            do you really think that anyone consider      Erik Malund      07/12/05 12:26      
                                                               The $3.000.000 machine      Jan Waclawek      07/12/05 13:31      
            Yes, but...      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 07:42      
   I have one more ...        Slobodan Mandaric      07/05/05 06:07      
      CVS or SVN        Benjamin Damet      07/05/05 06:19      
         ....      Benjamin Damet      07/05/05 17:33      
   re:ISR      Jacob Boyce      07/06/05 12:42      
      defeating a purpose      Erik Malund      07/06/05 14:08      
         re:ISR      Jacob Boyce      07/06/05 15:11      
   Wikipedia:: debugging (etc.)      James Hinnant      07/06/05 20:37      
   Another one for your list      Andy Neil      07/07/05 00:38      
   PC-LINT      Mahmood Elnasser      07/07/05 13:58      
      anyone not using it?      Erik Malund      07/07/05 14:21      
         re:anyone not using it      Jacob Boyce      07/07/05 14:26      
            PC lint cost about $200      Erik Malund      07/07/05 14:34      
               PC Lint      Jacob Boyce      07/07/05 14:37      
            PC lint cost about $200      Erik Malund      07/07/05 14:36      
               Not Always      Neil Kurzman      07/07/05 18:09      
                  amen to that      Erik Malund      07/08/05 06:03      
   All nice and pretty...      Bartosz Wucke      07/11/05 05:19      
      Noise problems?      Payam Soltany      07/11/05 19:01      

Back to Subject List