Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I have inherited a very old (first commits are in 1999) code base and have found 500 of the 2000 or so unit tests to be failing. My question is, should I go through each test manually and check if it is still relevant or should I start over?
Nobody here can answer this as such, but you have to ask for each test:
Does this test still make sense? If not, remove it.
Is the test testing something that should work? Do something to fix it up.
Is the test conceptually useful, but what it tests has changed so it is now failing? Rewrite it so that it works in its new way.
How much effort to fix vs. value is the test? If it's a lot of effort, and low value, maybe remove it...
We can't really say whether you should do one thing or another.
It's probably worth just LOOKING at the tests, and especially looking at the effort of fixing the test before starting any real work.
You may also need to consult with some kind of test-manager for your group, and seek their input to the coverage/bug rate/common problems, etc for that part of the code.
When I look at old tests in our code base, it's sometimes best to remove, sometimes worth "fixing up" and sometimes worth starting from scratch. Unless you are familiar with the test, it's hard to say before you spend some effort on investigating the issue...
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
My doctor uses software in his practice. He is always annoyed about the focus in one form. When he heard that I was a junior developer, he asked me if I could change the focus of the text field to another text field but i have no source code. only the exe. Is there a possibility with any tools to change the program?
Whilst in theory this might be possible, I would strongly advise against it.
You trying to de-compile the exe, figure it out what to change, and then re-compile, is unlikely to end well. De-compiling doesn't magically get you the original source - you get something, but it's likely to be extremely difficult to comprehend. Even if you get as far as successful re-compilation, you have as much chance of breaking the program completely, or introducing unexpected bugs, as you have of fixing the specific issue.
And anyway if you did that you'd immediately invalidate any support you did have from the vendor, as well as probably breaking the license conditions, and most importantly you're potentially putting patients at risk by screwing up the software accidentally.
None of those risks are worth taking just for a bit of irritation over setting the focus in a form. Maybe instead you can just take a look at the GUI and see if it's possible for the doctor to quickly and easily use the tab key to move the focus to the other field without too much friction - most forms should support that if they're written in a good way.
And at the end of the day it would make more sense for the doctor to raise a feature request with the makers / vendors of the software (to either change the default, or at least introduce an option so it can be configured).
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
Of course, it does depend on the application in question. If I am using, for example, a grammar checker to check for mistakes to make the code more readable, I don't think that that is a bad practice (though tell me if it is).
But I am thinking about bigger extensions like Resharper that adds so much, with me not even knowing 95% of what it does.
My big question is: is it a bad practice to use Resharper or similar applications that I mostly don't understand (while the few bits I do understand does help me), while I don't even know how most of the basic Visual Studios application works?
A productivity tool (like R# or others) is supposed to enhance your productivity.
That means you should be able to do your job, just do it faster (or cheaper or whatever other metric you use) with the tool.
If you catch yourself not being able to do the job without the tool, because you don't understand what the tool does or cannot replicate it without the tool, that is a problem.
Just keep in mind that a tool can vanish for any reason at any time. Your employer may not want to pay for it, may not like it, use a different product or maybe the product does not support your preferred environment anymore or simply has bugs. You cannot tell an employer that you cannot do something because a $100 tool broke when you are paid $100K. It's acceptable that you take longer, but not that you have to give up.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
So, before I post my question, I will add a little bit of premise to it. I have written quite some code for academic purposes, but never before was it for production or an actual client.
What I would always do is this:
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//Do all the programming here
}
However, now when I have to build actual software for client (a small one), I find this process tedious and hard to handle as the code grows long.
I still create separate classes and do some of the work here and there, but I think it's not the correct direction.
What am I missing? How professional developers do it?
Thanks.
EDIT : This is not exactly a coding question however I still choose StackOverflow because I really want the different perspectives of the superb professionals present here. I am just an industry newbie, so I really need to start learning in the right direction.
I find this process tedious and hard to handle as the code grows long.
You are correct.
I still create separate classes and do some of the work here and there, but I think it's not the correct direction.
It is the correct direction. Programming is about abstraction. Properties, methods, handlers, classes, and so on, are all abstractions. Abstractions are useful because they present less complexity than their implementation details, and can therefore be understood and used effectively. Just as you do not learn how to drive by manipulating valves and cylinders and springs and camshafts; you learn abstractions like brakes and gear selectors.
When you learn to drive you are handed a pile of abstractions which you must learn to use. When you are programming you are both handed a pile of existing abstractions -- variables, lists, types, and so on, are all abstractions -- but you are also expected to build your own.
How do professional developers do it?
This is not a site to teach you how to program. This is a site for specific questions about actual code. Professional developers do it by spending thousands of hours learning from others and practicing their craft; go get started! Come on back when you have a specific question about actual code.
I think you are doing it right ! Indeed managing large programs is a hard job, you have to know how to modulate your code. You can create diagram representing your project so it will make the editing a lot easier.
Here is a link with some tools for Architecture and Modeling with Visual Studio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThEP7DgVAC0
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
I see that people have ask more specific questions, but mine is broad, why should one test any routes at all? where does the benefit of this really shine? Thanks!
PS currently doing this in .Net C# MVC 3
Just my 2ยข to a very subjective question:
Because by unit testing your routes, a single key combination (that will run the unit tests) allows you to verify whether they behave as expected in contrast to running through your entire application and manually testing them by wasting enormous time and by potenatially forgetting to manually test some of the edge cases. Also when some other developer inherits the code base and starts modifying it, it is much easier for him to run this same key combination (that runs the unit tests) and get instant feedback whether his modifications didn't have some impact on the existing functionality rather than manually going through the entire application and clicking through all the links and stuff.
And from practical point of view I use MvcContrib TestHelper to unit test my routes.
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
My class has like 30-40 properties, and I really want to unit test.
But I have to create a moq instance (many of them, with different combinations etc).
Is there an easy way? This is real work!
My class can't be refactored, "trust me" (hehe, no really it can't, they are just properties of the object that are very tightly coupled).
Sounds like you need to do some major refactoring. I would start by taking a good look at the single responsibility principle, and making classes that will only have 1 reason to change. Once you break out functionality into separate classes that deal with only 1 responsibility, you can start writing tests for those classes, and they shouldn't take a page-full of mock objects.
This is the advantage of test-driven development -- you immediately run into the problems caused by huge classes, and are driven to avoid them if you want to be able to write tests.
Personally, I don't think you need to try every combination to test your class.
You mention lots about properties, but little about behavior. Shouldn't the tests be about behavior more than state?
There could well be situations where, due to the nature of the class, there are a lot of legitimate properties. I know, I've been there and done that. When examining that class, it is important to determine that each property really does belong in the one class, and not elsewhere. Single Responsibility Principle comes in play here.
Unfortunately, to break any tight coupling, it will take some time and effort to refactor. Just suck it up and get 'er done!