isn't this the book that totally disses random testing?
-
-
-
Not that I saw, although I could've missed it. AFAICT, random testing isn't really on the author's radar (or maybe it's dismissed in one paragraph somewhere and not heavily discussed).
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Although, I love all of this, I have a nit to pick about the picture of monitoring the debugging process, specifically counter-factual language. One of the three traps of accident investigation (which also apply to our debugging):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqaFT-0cY7U …
-
I hasten to add that if I ignore the counter-factual expression, the intent in the recommendations are still solid. I just wanna be sure we don't take the good part of that and then adopt (or reinforce) habits of counter-factuals.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.