DaedTech

Stories about Software

By

The First DaedTech Digest

I mentioned this idea in a post I wrote the other day, the idea of a digest style of post.  So today, I’d like to give it a try.

You see this sort of thing a lot, all over the place.  So-called planet sites have been around for a long time, aggregating community-related articles into a single place.  Examples include one of my personal favorites, the Morning Brew.

There’s just one difference in what I’m proposing.  Instead of gathering stuff that others have written, I’m going to digest the stuff that I’ve written.  In the last year, we’ve turned my paid blogging for other sites into a tech content business, taking blogging from a side hustle and hobby to a professional gig.  So, I write a lot of blog posts.

Historically, I’ve simply cross posted these with canonical linking, leading in with “editorial note: I originally wrote this post for…”  But I’m thinking of taking DaedTech in a bit of a different direction than just generalized software-oriented blog posts.  More on that later.

The point here is that, instead of pushing one of these cross posts out per day, I’m going to do a single digest post per week containing posts that I’ve made.  I have about 90 backlogged drafts in my folder, so at first it’s going to be posts I made some months back.  But sooner or later, I’ll catch up and give the posts I’ve published in the last week.

But anyway, without further ado, here’s the digest.

Some Posts to Check Out

  • This is a piece that I wrote for the Monitis blog.  It’s about threat modeling and the woes of being an e-retailer and guarding yourself against criminals and ne’er do wells.
  • I wrote a post for TechTown that was a primer about unit testing in C#.  It gives you a back to basics explanation, the value proposition, and the simplest imaginable examples of writing unit tests.
  • This is another post that I wrote for Monitis. It’s about the C# IEnumerable construct and how, if you misunderstand it, you can kill your site’s performance.  This has to do with how IEnumerable can encapsulate deferred execution, and that it only promises a strategy for obtaining items, rather than giving you those items.
  • I wrote this post for SubMain.  It’s about how something that’s seemingly inconsequential — spell checking your code (specifically, C#) is more important than you might think.  There are subtle things to consider that you might not have considered.
  • This post is actually going to become part of Microsoft’s official documentation!  Seriously, no kidding.  Bill Wagner wrote to Patrick and I about this post, and it’s now in their documentation build on Github.  Anyway, I wrote it for NDepend, and it’s a walk back through past major version of C#, reflecting back on nearly 2 decades of the language.  It was a fun journey down memory lane.

And, that’s it.   Happy reading, and happy Friday!

By

A Look at Some Unit Test Framework Options for .NET

Editorial note: I originally wrote this post for the Stackify blog.  You can check out the original here, at their site.  While you’re there have a look at their offerings, Prefix and Retrace.

If you enjoy the subject of human cognitive biases, you should check out the curse of knowledge.  When dealing with others, we tend to assume they know what we know.  And we do this when no justification for the assumption exists.

Do you fancy a more concrete example?  Take a new job and count how many people bombard you with company jargon and acronyms, knowing full well you just started a few hours ago.  This happens because these folks cannot imagine not knowing these things without expending considerable mental effort.

Why do I lead with this in a post about unit test frameworks?  Well, it seems entirely appropriate to me.  I earn my living as an IT management and strategy consultant, causing me to spend time at many companies helping them improve software development practice.  Because of this, I have occasion to see an awful lot of introductions to unit testing.  And these introductions usually subconsciously assume knowledge of unit testing.

“It’s easy!  Just pick a unit test runner and a coverage tool, and get those setup.  Oh, you’ll also probably want to pick a mocking framework, and here are some helpful Nuget packages.  Anyway, now just write a test.  We’ll start with a calculator class…”

Today, I will do my best to spare you that.  I have some practice with this, since I write a lot, publish courses, and train developers.  So let’s take a look at test frameworks.

What Are Unit Tests?

Thought you’d caught me there, didn’t you?  Don’t worry.  I won’t just assume you know these things.

Let’s start with unit testing in its most basic form, leaving all other subjects aside.  You want to focus on a piece of functionality in your code and test it in isolation.  For example, let’s say that we had the aforementioned Calculator class and that it contained an Add(int, int) method.  Let’s say that you want to write some code to test that method.

No magic there.  I just create a test called “CalculatorTester” and then write a method that instantiates and exercises Calculator.Add().  You could write this knowing nothing about unit testing practice at all.  And, if someone had told you to automate the testing of Calculator.Add(), you may have done this exact thing.

Congratulations.  You have written a unit test.   I say this because it focuses on a method and tests it in isolation.

Read More

By

Should You Aim for 100 Percent Test Coverage?

Editorial note: I originally wrote this post for the NDepend blog.  You can check out the original here, at their site.  While you’re there, check out all of the different code metrics and rules that NDepend offers.

Test coverage serves as one of the great lightning rods in the world of software development.  First, people ask whether it makes for a good metric at all.  Then they ask, if you want to use it as a metric, should you go for 100 percent coverage?  If not, what percentage should you go for? Maybe 42 percent, since that’s the meaning of life?

I don’t mean to trivialize an important discussion.  But sometimes it strikes me that this one could use some trivializing.  People dig in and draw battle lines over it, and counterproductive arguments often ensue.  It’s strange how fixated people get on this.

I’ll provide my take on the matter here, after a while.  But first, I’d like to offer a somewhat more philosophical look at the issue (hopefully without delving into overly abstract navel-gazing along the lines of “What even is a test, anyway, in the greater scheme of life?”)

What Does “Test Coverage” Measure?

First of all, let’s be very clear about what this metric measures.  Many in the debate — particularly those on the “less is more” side of it — quickly point out that test coverage does not measure the quality of the tests.  “You can have 100 percent coverage with completely worthless tests,” they’ll point out.  And they’ll be completely right.

To someone casually consuming this metric, the percentage can easily mislead.  After all, 100 percent coverage sounds an awful lot like 100 percent certainty.  If you hired me to do some work on your car and I told you that I’d done my work “with 100 percent coverage,” what would you assume?  I’m guessing you’d assume that I was 100 percent certain nothing would go wrong and that I invited you to be equally certain.  Critics of the total coverage school of thought point to this misunderstanding as a reason not to pursue that level of test coverage.  But personally, I just think it’s a reason to clarify definitions.

Read More

By

How Much Unit Testing is Enough?

Editorial note: I originally wrote this post for the TechTown blog.  You can check out the original here, at their site.  While you’re there, have a look at their training and course offerings.

I work as an independent consultant, and I also happen to have created a book and some courses about unit testing.  So I field a lot of questions about the subject.  In fact, companies sometimes bring me in specifically to help their developers adopt the practice.  And those efforts usually fall into a predictable pattern.

Up until the moment that I arrive, most of the developers have spent zero time unit testing.  But nevertheless, they have all found something to occupy them full time at the office.  So they must now choose: do less of something else or start working overtime for the sake of unit testing.

This choice obviously inspires little enthusiasm.  Most developers I meet in my travels are conscientious folks.  They’ve been giving it their all and so they interpret this new thing that takes them away from their duties as a hindrance.  And, in spite of signing a contract to bring me in, management harbors the same worry.  While they buy into the long term benefit, they fret the short term cost.

All of this leads to a very predictable question.  How much unit testing is enough?

Clients invariably ask me this, and usually they ask it almost immediately.  They want to understand how to spend the minimum amount of time required to realize benefits, but not a second longer.  This way they can return to the pressing matters they’ve delayed for the sake of learning this new skill.

Read More

By

Unit Testing: Basics and Best Practices

Editorial Note: I originally wrote this post for the Stackify blog.  You can check out the original here, at their site.  While you’re there, have a look at their tools to help you track down and fix production issues.

A couple of year ago, I wrote a book about unit testing.  Now, I didn’t just sit down one day and decide to do it, and no big publisher commissioned me to do it.  The book started from humbler origins and grew somewhat organically.

It started as a series of presentations I did for groups new to the practice.  With more feedback and requests, it then grew into a blog post series and longer presentations.  Eventually, due to even wider demand, I made it into a book.

What was it that made this particular content so appealing, when no shortage of authors address this topic?  I feel pretty confident that it was the lead into the topic.  “You still don’t know how to unit test, and your secret is safe with me.”

When I started in this industry, only an avant garde fringe wrote automated tests for their code.  Over the last 15 years, however, that number has exploded, and the practice has become mainstream.  But “mainstream” does not mean “universal.”  Plenty of folks still do not have comfort with, or even exposure to the practice.  And yet, a form of peer pressure causes them to play that close to the vest.

So I reached out to these folks to say, “hey, no worries.  You can learn, and you don’t even have to climb too steep of a hill.”  I’d like to revisit that approach again, here, today, and in the form of a blog post.

Let’s get started with unit testing in C#, assuming that you know absolutely nothing about it.

Read More