Skip to main content


Showing posts from April, 2014

In the Context of Context-Driven

I started an enjoyable discussion on Twitter the other day. Here's a brief summary. So I idly wondered whether it was possible to construct a barber-style paradox around context-driven testing (CDT) and tweeted this: A Context-Driven tester says that CDT is not applicable on some project, given the context, and tests accordingly. Is this CDT? I deliberately left  this  ambiguous. It could mean a few things, including: deciding how to test in the context any testing activities undertaken after evaluation of context  both of the above  all of the work the tester does on that project I think it's possible to make a case for all of them being CDT based on the original tweet. But it doesn't mean that any particular instance of them  must  be. For example, the context-driven tester might not act in a context-driven way at some point (perhaps only context-aware). Or while  not doing CDT  the context-driven tester might actually be constantly re-evaluating the c

Exploratory Tumbling

A short questionnaire: 1. Do you ever find yourself navigating unfamiliar territory in search of areas that return some value? 2. Are you a bacterium? If your answers were (no, no) or (yes, yes) feel free to stop reading now. I was listening to a podcast, The Biology of Freedom , from the BBC's Discovery programme  this week. Towards the end they talk about how cells move around seeking food using a kind of targeted random walk. It's called  chemotaxis : [a bacterium's] movement will look like ... relatively straight swims interrupted by random tumbles that reorient [it] ... By repeatedly evaluating their course ... bacteria can direct their motion to find favorable locations with high concentrations of attractants A short questionnaire: 1. Would you be interested in a heuristic that might help guide your exploration? 2. Are you a tester? If your answers are (yes, yes) there might be the germ of an idea for you here. Image:

Cistern Thinking

The toilet seat heuristic: the conspicuous risk may not be the only or the highest risk. The glaringly obvious and the mundane should both be considered and risks evaluated across them. The Guardian : "In truth, many shared bathrooms are cleaner than, say, the telephone on your office desk, your computer keyboard, the dishcloth by your kitchen sink ... [but] it is perfectly natural, perfectly logical, that we expect [ faecal bacteria ]  to be congregating in greatest numbers somewhere around the toilet bowl" Image: