Skip to main content

Love My Work

In a recent episode of the Vernon Richard show, testing's dynamic duo were inspired by Valentine's Day to talk about their love for our craft. On the topic of tools, Richard sings the praises of Selenium, but Vernon takes a different tack, instead talking about tool creation ... and me! 

I worked at the same company as Vern for a couple of years and we'd find time to pair on something most weeks even though our responsibilities didn't overlap at all. Sometimes he'd bring a problem, sometimes it'd be show-and-tell about what we were working on, occasionally it was about people and process, but what really lit him up was when we looked at code together, particularly if we built something.

I was out walking and listening to podcasts when the episode popped up in my feed. Honestly, it was a strange feeling to hear myself being talked about, even though Vern gave me a heads-up that he'd done it just after it was recorded. What he said is nothing that he hasn't said to me privately (and yes, he really does call me Mr Wizard) yet hearing what I do called out as something special in public, despite knowing that many people don't work the same way, is still weird.

I thought, modestly of course, it might be interesting to note down what Vern said and provide some links so I took the YouTube transcript and tried to edit it into something that reads reasonably well while preserving Vern's unique voice:

What I love is people's ability to create their own tools, to use their technical understanding of the application that they're trying to interact with. My favorite example of this is my buddy James Thomas. He just makes tools. He's got such a beautiful understanding of technology.

I always call him Mr Wizard but he always says "Vern, I probably know a very tiny percentage of a lot of tools" but that actually gives him gives him great power and great flexibility.

He can create tools out of bash, he can create tools using python, he's a grep ninja, ... When we worked together I was fortunate enough I would I would try and spend some time with him once a week and we would just go through some technical stuff and it invariably that meant he was showing me how he was doing stuff.

Sometimes it meant I would like to be able to do something and I know there's a way to do it technically but I need help and so he would spend some time trying to, you know, poke me along to try and figure something out in bash.

That is what that is what I absolutely love. If I can become that guy ...

I'm in a people leadership role right now so I don't know how much opportunity there will be for me to get my hands dirty in the day job but I still have this dream in the back of my head that I can basically become like James or like my other friend Lisi [Hocke].

I'm not even talking about being someone like Rich [Bradshaw] or someone like Angie Jones, or Mark Winteringham, or Amber Race, or all these other ridiculous humans who are up one with the machine.

I just want to be able to just be comfortable in bash and be able to cobble together a script and create these tools that can go and grab information from, here grab it from there, pipe it into a thing, diff the things, and spit out the results you know.

Just 👌

In the show notes, there are links to some examples of the kinds of things Vern was talking about:

I'll add a few more below and note that I have a broad view of what automation is and know from experience that even a tiny amount can return huge value. A key thing to keep in mind is that many tasks (or parts of those tasks) have the potential to be automated, to whatever level makes sense at the time.

To give a super-trivial example: I don't know many times I have watched someone scrolling back and forth in a file looking for a string when they could hit Ctrl-F and find one in a second, or call grep and find all the hits in even less time, or write a bash script and call it to find all the hits, sort them, count duplicates, format the results and write a CSV file, or ... 

Its flattering that Vern called out my work. Naturally, I like some parts of what I do better than others but I can say unequivocally that building just enough tooling at the right cost to solve a problem or answer a question is something I love.
Image: https://flic.kr/p/5b8aHn

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Meet Me Halfway?

  The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "Stop answering my questions with questions." Sure, I can do that. In return, please stop asking me questions so open to interpretation that any answ...

The Best Programmer Dan Knows

  I was pairing with my friend Vernon at work last week, on a tool I've been developing. He was smiling broadly as I talked him through what I'd done because we've been here before. The tool facilitates a task that's time-consuming, inefficient, error-prone, tiresome, and important to get right. Vern knows that those kinds of factors trigger me to change or build something, and that's why he was struggling not to laugh out loud. He held himself together and asked a bunch of sensible questions about the need, the desired outcome, and the approach I'd taken. Then he mentioned a talk by Daniel Terhorst-North, called The Best Programmer I Know, and said that much of it paralleled what he sees me doing. It was my turn to laugh then, because I am not a good programmer, and I thought he knew that already. What I do accept, though, is that I am focussed on the value that programs can give, and getting some of that value as early as possible. He sent me a link to the ta...

Can Code, Can't Code, Is Useful

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "If testers can’t code, they’re of no use to us" My first reaction is to wonder what you expect from your testers. I am immediately interested ...

Beginning Sketchnoting

In September 2017 I attended  Ian Johnson 's visual note-taking workshop at  DDD East Anglia . For the rest of the day I made sketchnotes, including during Karo Stoltzenburg 's talk on exploratory testing for developers  (sketch below), and since then I've been doing it on a regular basis. Karo recently asked whether I'd do a Team Eating (the Linguamatics brown bag lunch thing) on sketchnoting. I did, and this post captures some of what I said. Beginning sketchnoting, then. There's two sides to that: I still regard myself as a beginner at it, and today I'll give you some encouragement and some tips based on my experience, to begin sketchnoting for yourselves. I spend an enormous amount of time in situations where I find it helpful to take notes: testing, talking to colleagues about a problem, reading, 1-1 meetings, project meetings, workshops, conferences, and, and, and, and I could go on. I've long been interested in the approaches I've evol...

Don't Know? Find Out!

In What We Know We Don't Know , Hillel Wayne crisply summarises a handful of research findings about software development, describes how the research is carried out and reviewed and how he explores it, and contrasts those evidence-based results with the pronouncements of charismatic thought leaders. He also notes how and why this kind of research is hard in the software world. I won't pull much from the talk because I want to encourage you to watch it. Go on, it's reasonably short, it's comprehensible for me at 1.25x, and you can skip the section on Domain-Driven Design (the talk was at DDD Europe) if that's not your bag. Let me just give the same example that he opens with: research shows that most code reviews focus more on the first file presented to reviewers rather than the most important file in the eye of the developer. What we should learn: flag the starting and other critical files to receive more productive reviews. You never even thought about that possi...

How do I Test AI?

  Recently a few people have asked me how I test AI. I'm happy to share my experiences, but I frame the question more broadly, perhaps something like this: what kinds of things do I consider when testing systems with artificial intelligence components .  I freestyled liberally the first time I answered but when the question came up again I thought I'd write a few bullets to help me remember key things. This post is the latest iteration of that list. Caveats: I'm not an expert; what you see below is a reminder of things to pick up on during conversations so it's quite minimal; it's also messy; it's absolutely not a guide or a set of best practices; each point should be applied in context; the categories are very rough; it's certainly not complete.  Also note that I work with teams who really know what they're doing on the domain, tech, and medical safety fronts and some of the things listed here are things they'd typically do some or all of. Testing ...

Express, Listen, and Field

Last weekend I participated in the LLandegfan Exploratory Workshop on Testing (LLEWT) 2024, a peer conference in a small parish hall on Anglesey, north Wales. The topic was communication and I shared my sketchnotes and a mind map from the day a few days ago. This post summarises my experience report.  Express, Listen, and Field Just about the most hands-on, practical, and valuable training I have ever done was on assertiveness with a local Cambridge coach, Laura Dain . In it she introduced Express, Listen, and Field (ELF), distilled from her experience across many years in the women’s movement, business, and academia.  ELF: say your key message clearly and calmly, actively listen to the response, and then focus only on what is relevant to your needs. I blogged a little about it back in 2017 and I've been using it ever since. Assertiveness In a previous role, I was the manager of a test team and organised training for the whole ...

Software Sisyphus

The Association for Software Testing is crowd-sourcing a book,  Navigating the World as a Context-Driven Tester , which aims to provide  responses to common questions and statements about testing from a  context-driven perspective . It's being edited by  Lee Hawkins  who is  posing questions on  Twitter ,   LinkedIn , Mastodon , Slack , and the AST  mailing list  and then collating the replies, focusing on practice over theory. I've decided to  contribute  by answering briefly, and without a lot of editing or crafting, by imagining that I'm speaking to someone in software development who's acting in good faith, cares about their work and mine, but doesn't have much visibility of what testing can be. Perhaps you'd like to join me?   --00-- "How can I possibly test 'all the stuff' every iteration?" Whoa! There's a lot to unpack there, so let me break it down a little: who is suggesting that "al...

Not a Happy Place

  A few months ago I stopped having therapy because I felt I had stabilised myself enough to navigate life without it. For the time being, anyway.  I'm sure the counselling helped me but I couldn't tell you how and I've chosen not to look deeply into it. For someone who is usually pretty analytical this is perhaps an interesting decision but I knew that I didn't want to be second-guessing my counsellor, Sue, or mentally cross-referencing stuff that I'd researched while we were talking. And talk was what we mostly did, with Sue suggesting hardly any specific tools for me to try. One that she did recommend was finding a happy place to visualise, somewhere that I could be out of the moment for a moment to calm disruptive thoughts. (Something like this .) Surprisingly, I found that I couldn't conjure anywhere up inside my head. That's when I realised that I've always had difficulty seeing with my mind's eye but never called it out. If I try to imagine ev...

Why Question?

Questions are a powerful testing tool and, like any tool, can be used in different ways in different scenarios with different motivations and different results. A significant part of my role is generating questions and I will generally have a lot of them. I will rarely ask them all, though, and I've put a lot of time and effort into learning to be comfortable with that. A couple of examples: I was in a meeting this week where the technical conversation was too deep for me to give a perspective from a position of knowledge. I could have disengaged, but I didn't. Instead, I asked occasional questions, not wanting to derail the discussion or disrupt the flow. Some were detail questions, to help grow my understanding. Some were scoping questions, to help understand motivations. The one that really landed, however, was about the focus of the meeting. Although I couldn't contribute at a low level, I understood enough to suspect that we were not discussing the key problem tha...