I only realized that it has been lilliputian over 5 years since I wrote almost five software testing myths in addition to it is unfortunate that I all the same see, take away heed in addition to discovery people controversy almost around of those myths afterwards one-half a decade. While in that place are literally tens of those myths floating around, hither is my accept on five of the most mutual testing myths that I proceed hearing these days.
Be it the blogoshpere, the hence called proficient columns on diverse sites, social media discussions, tech manufacture journals, or casual after-lunch business office gossips, these myths are equally slow to to hold upwards spotted equally slow it is to discovery bugs inward a half-baked software developed yesteryear a novice programmer.
So without farther ado, hither goes the top 5 software testing misconceptions in addition to myths (in no item order) that are plaguing our modern 24-hour interval testers these days:
1. Software Testing is a Mundane, No-Brainer Job
Ohh, yeah? On 2nd thoughts, maybe in that place is around chemical element of truth to that statement. Testing tin indeed hold upwards tedious in addition to experience similar a mundane monotonous task if YOU ARE DOING information technology WRONG! I've seen people fountain to this determination (that testing is boring) because they come across (and believe) testing equally 'repeatedly' doing same/similar tasks over in addition to over again.
Going yesteryear that logic, programming, spider web designing, analysis, accounting, banking in addition to whatever day-to-day vital activities similar eating, sleeping etc tin also hold upwards considered tedious if y'all only aspect at the 'repetition' part. Moreover, create y'all halt eating in addition to sleeping because it is a repetitive task that y'all are needed to create daily? Or create y'all alter your nutrient carte du jour in addition to sleeping habits when y'all experience bored?
But if y'all are genuinely a good tester, in addition to hence y'all would in all likelihood aspect at testing equally an data gathering action done amongst an intent of exploring in addition to discovering answers [NOT only flaws or bugs inward the software] to questions that nobody had asked before. To ambit so, y'all would demand to study, explore, observe, analyze, usage the software to hold upwards able to evaluate it. Does that audio tedious to you?
If y'all ever larn bored of testing something, don't blame your job. Rather blame yourself in addition to CHANGE the agency y'all are testing, thinking in addition to devising your assay out ideas in addition to earlier y'all know it testing the same software would origin feeling hence much of fun, in ane trial again.
2. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 Tester Should Be Able To Test Everything
Yes, equally a tester I tin of class test everything provided equally a projection stakeholder y'all tin provide me amongst indefinite provide of resources, infrastructure, budget, fourth dimension in addition to what-not!
It is foolish to hold off that a tester (or a testing team) tin assay out each in addition to every assay out scenario, theoretically possible inside their given time-frame in addition to amongst the supplied resources. While a goodness tester would generate critical assay out scenarios in addition to prioritize them in addition to test, it is impractical to hypothesize that it is possible to assay out ALL those scenarios. Wouldn't that hold upwards same equally expecting 'testing tin deliver a 100% põrnikas gratuitous product'?
The reasons why this is non possible tin hold upwards many -- lack of enough time, lack of available infrastructure to assay out something, vastness of all permutation in addition to combination that tin be in addition to hence forth. It is an inherent character of software testing that it tin demo that bugs exist, but non that bugs doesn't exist.
Lets accept a uncomplicated example. We all know that life critical systems similar instruments used inward medical facilities, airplanes, infinite ships etc become through a stringent fix of testing physical care for to ensure cypher goes incorrect when they are operational. However, tin the tester(s) testing a flying genuinely predict in addition to assay out considering the actual air pressure, altitude, position out of passengers in addition to crews, full charge on the flight, air current speed, temperature etc, on whatever item day? Can their simulator imitate whatever random day's environmental in addition to other variables that the flying volition own got to accept when inward production?
3. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 Tester's Job is to Find Bugs
I don't blame y'all if y'all don't come across how this is a myth or misconception -- many don't. It is easy, exceptional for soul who has only of late started her career equally a software tester, to larn confused almost her responsibilities equally a tester. And many oft autumn into the trap of believing that finding lot of bugs inward the software is their prime number goal.
I acknowledge that finding bugs inward the software is an of import share of what a tester should do. But the storey doesn't cease there. Along amongst only finding bugs, testers create analyze the requirements, review the production architecture, provide ideas to brand the production to a greater extent than user-friendly, validate the assist documents in addition to a lot of other things.
4. Testers Add No Value to The Software
People who conceive this myth oft are made to believe that a tester’s usage is strictly express in addition to adds no value to the product.
On the contrary, a skilled tester is oft an proficient of the organisation (product) nether test. Unlike the programmers who oft pass most of their fourth dimension working on a really specific area, business office or element of the application, the tester analyzes in addition to understands how the entire organisation industrial plant from an end-to-end standpoint. Testers larn a amend peril to demonstrate their agreement of the production in a agency that adds value to to the product.
5. Test Automation Will Eliminate Human Testers:
This is maybe the most outrageous prediction that many hence called self-proclaimed assay out automation gurus are making at the moment. What is fifty-fifty to a greater extent than insane is the fact that in that place are genuinely testers who are believing it!
Can assay out automation tools supersede human testers? I'd say a large NO. Why this is non going to come about ever, is simple. I recollect non hence long agone when the concept of Computer-aided software technology scientific discipline (CASE) emerged in addition to of a abrupt people started talking how computers would origin writing codes in addition to inward plough tin brand human programmers obsolete. But whether that genuinely happened is a affair of everyone's approximate today.
Similarly assay out automation is never going to supersede human testers, UNLESS, of course, humanoid auto-bots accept over our planet ane day. Until that (judgment day) arrives, nosotros human testers volition never hold upwards expendable for a really uncomplicated reason. We own got something that the assay out automation tools create non have; it is 'emotions'. And since the users of the software nosotros assay out are almost ever hold upwards humans, it is the human testers who are going to own got this wages of testing it amend than whatever automation tools.
For instance, a tool tin tell me if the fonts, color in addition to layout of a covert is equally per the assay out script but it tin never tell me if a human existence is going to discovery that covert pleasant plenty to use.
Having said that, assay out automation tools are non necessarily bad for testing. They tin genuinely hold upwards useful for testing for sure aspects of testing (like large calculations, testing involving performance in addition to load, repeated regression tests etc) that would otherwise hold upwards really time-consuming in addition to hectic for a normal human tester. Hence, nether for sure contexts, automation tools tin human action equally supplementary tools to assist human testers; NOT to supersede them.