The technique of unit testing is good, and catches many errors, and code coverage is a very good companion in finding out what you haven't tested. Unlike what some posters above have indicated, this is generic, and has nothing to do with the programming paradigm used, nor the programming language. There are two major problems, however.
1. With unit testing, you're only testing that the unit does what you expects it to, given its interfaces (the API, global variables, whatever...) If a bug is a misunderstanding of the specs, you won't catch it, unless the person who wrote the unit test is the one who wrote the specs.
2. You won't discover errors in situations you haven't tested for, and if the code is written poorly enough, it'll give you very good coverage numbers. Example, code that has no error handling what so ever, and a test suite that doesn't subject it to error situations.
These problems doesn't make unit testing, and code coverage analysis bad. It's far better than not even trying. But you have to be aware of them and scrutinise the test suite to see what it *doesn't* test, especially if code coverage numbers are really high.
That one is a stroke of genious. Just imagine how simple making a perfect firewall would be. Want to block spam and intrusions attempts? Deny all packets with evil-bit == 1.
When I grew up, in the 70s and 80's, the eastern European countries were scorned for their obvious distrust in its own people, since copies were kept of phone conversations and letters. Still we're horrified by the vast archives of Stasi, Securitate and similar organisations. Yet, what we're about to introduce goes so much further. Is it only because it's so easy to do with electronic information that it feels OK to do so? I have a feeling that it would not be appreciated to suggest a legislation to make copies of all snail mail and store for use in fight against crime and terrorism.
_/Bjorn.
Ah, so it has struck US politicians that threats to the nation may (at least in theory) come from people who are not forreign nationals.
Not that I envy those of you who live there, regardless of nationality. Freedom used to be cherished, and covernment control and distrust of own citisens in the former eastern block used to be scorned. Bring that point of view back! Your fears are scores for your enemies.
_/Bjorn.
Hah. This reminds me of my favourite power source, children. Everybody knows that kids have an infinite supply of energy. Now, if kindergartens had toys that absorbs this energy from the children in their games, the kindergartens can actually become very lucrative power plants, paying the parents to have their kids there. Hyperactive kids are of course the ideal;-)
_/Bjorn.
Being a private pilot myself, I can see why one wants to reduce costs. It does take an awful lot of both money and time to get a PPL. However, never forget that flying can be very unforgiving if you do something you shouldn't. I just hope that what little requirements are left, are rigid enough to not cause danger to others.
_/Bjorn.
Hmmm. If you have something in space that feels nasty to keep around there, has an engine with limited spare energy, and is controllable, why not send it towards the great bright waste disposal unit in the centre of our system?
_/Bjorn.
I don't know when name@subdomain.domain addresses became the norm, but my first e-mail address, from 1988, was formed just like that. Somehow I don't think I was the first one ever.
_/Bjorn.
I'm a bit confused, or the journalist is. Small weather radars itself is nothing new. They are available for small general aviation aircraft, weigh only a few kg, and cost about as much as a small non-radar-equipped general aviation aircraft. The idea of using a large array of such to get a big picture, however, is very interesting indeed.
_/Bjorn.
Slashdot Mirror
The technique of unit testing is good, and catches many errors, and code coverage is a very good companion in finding out what you haven't tested. Unlike what some posters above have indicated, this is generic, and has nothing to do with the programming paradigm used, nor the programming language. There are two major problems, however. 1. With unit testing, you're only testing that the unit does what you expects it to, given its interfaces (the API, global variables, whatever...) If a bug is a misunderstanding of the specs, you won't catch it, unless the person who wrote the unit test is the one who wrote the specs. 2. You won't discover errors in situations you haven't tested for, and if the code is written poorly enough, it'll give you very good coverage numbers. Example, code that has no error handling what so ever, and a test suite that doesn't subject it to error situations. These problems doesn't make unit testing, and code coverage analysis bad. It's far better than not even trying. But you have to be aware of them and scrutinise the test suite to see what it *doesn't* test, especially if code coverage numbers are really high.
That one is a stroke of genious. Just imagine how simple making a perfect firewall would be. Want to block spam and intrusions attempts? Deny all packets with evil-bit == 1.
When I grew up, in the 70s and 80's, the eastern European countries were scorned for their obvious distrust in its own people, since copies were kept of phone conversations and letters. Still we're horrified by the vast archives of Stasi, Securitate and similar organisations. Yet, what we're about to introduce goes so much further. Is it only because it's so easy to do with electronic information that it feels OK to do so? I have a feeling that it would not be appreciated to suggest a legislation to make copies of all snail mail and store for use in fight against crime and terrorism. _ /Bjorn.
Ah, so it has struck US politicians that threats to the nation may (at least in theory) come from people who are not forreign nationals. Not that I envy those of you who live there, regardless of nationality. Freedom used to be cherished, and covernment control and distrust of own citisens in the former eastern block used to be scorned. Bring that point of view back! Your fears are scores for your enemies. _ /Bjorn.
Hah. This reminds me of my favourite power source, children. Everybody knows that kids have an infinite supply of energy. Now, if kindergartens had toys that absorbs this energy from the children in their games, the kindergartens can actually become very lucrative power plants, paying the parents to have their kids there. Hyperactive kids are of course the ideal ;-)
_ /Bjorn.
Being a private pilot myself, I can see why one wants to reduce costs. It does take an awful lot of both money and time to get a PPL. However, never forget that flying can be very unforgiving if you do something you shouldn't. I just hope that what little requirements are left, are rigid enough to not cause danger to others. _ /Bjorn.
Hmmm. If you have something in space that feels nasty to keep around there, has an engine with limited spare energy, and is controllable, why not send it towards the great bright waste disposal unit in the centre of our system? _ /Bjorn.
I don't know when name@subdomain.domain addresses became the norm, but my first e-mail address, from 1988, was formed just like that. Somehow I don't think I was the first one ever. _ /Bjorn.
I'm a bit confused, or the journalist is. Small weather radars itself is nothing new. They are available for small general aviation aircraft, weigh only a few kg, and cost about as much as a small non-radar-equipped general aviation aircraft. The idea of using a large array of such to get a big picture, however, is very interesting indeed. _ /Bjorn.
How about a machine to make it stop rain instead? Would be infinitely more useful around here. (wet and cold, as usual.) _ /Bjorn.
Oh, but they did. The fire didn't spread, did it? _ /Bjorn.