#读书笔记 # The trilogy of Weinberg's technical thought: subverting the Perfect Software (3)

=====================

No emotion can deprive the brain of the ability to act and reason like fear.

People get defensive reactions when they are driven by fear. The most useful rule is to first not define the behavior of the other person as defensive, but treat it as a defensive reaction and see if it will show up in a mild test.

Although the underlying fear is not usually seen, it does exist. Try to determine what the other person is afraid of, and see what happens when you find a way to mitigate that fear.

The definition of quality is value to some people. As a project manager, you are concerned with the timely delivery of valuable products.

With enough practice, we can better identify and resolve the defensive reactions of others.

=====================

Suppose there are two sets of tests: perfect Tests and bad tests. Both sets of tests do not reveal any flaws when testing a perfect system without defects. So, simply from their ability to discover flaws, we can't see the difference between a perfect test and a bad test.

Good testing, "good" is not a property of a test, but a property used to describe a particular relationship between a test and an implementation. For example, for a system implementation, some kind of test may be very sufficient, and another implementation of the system, the test may be bad. For example, for the same system implementation, a set of identical tests may be sufficient for a company, but it is bad for another company. Therefore, "good" is not just a property of testing and implementation, but a property of the relationship between test, implementation, and scenario. We never know for sure whether a test is good by looking at a test in isolation, but there are many ways to know if a test is likely to be bad.

Many managers evaluate their testers based on how many flaws they find, which means that a low-quality system makes testers look better. If they are testing a perfect system, they will not find any flaws, and they may be dismissed as incompetent people. Under such a metric system, a bad developer would be the tester's best friend.

Never know if the test is done well, but if the test is done poorly, there are many ways to know or estimate it.

=====================

The misunderstanding of the accusation. Some people seem to think that if they accuse someone, talking in a tone of reproach and volume, they can make the problem faster, more effective, and more efficient, and they fall into the wrong place. The truth is often the opposite of what they think: the more time and energy someone spends looking for the person to blame, the less likely it is to solve the problem.

Poor testing results in poor quality, but good testing does not necessarily lead to good quality unless the rest of the development process is appropriate and properly executed.

#读书笔记 # The trilogy of Weinberg's technical thought: subverting the Perfect Software (3)