Better Software - November 2007 - (Page 30)

you’ve been testing software for a while, you’ve probably had some magic moments. For example, you begin testing a system with which you’re not particularly familiar, and after exploring it for a short time, you discover a major defect. The developers are amazed: “Wow! How did you find that?” “Well,” you say, preparing to describe your brilliant testing abilities. Then, opting for honesty, you admit, “I wish I knew.” Personally, these magic moments are one of the most enjoyable and satisfying parts of my testing work. But the “I wish I knew” drives me crazy. Exploratory testing (ET) is an ongoing mix of concurrent exploration, test design, and test execution. One key to ET is that each test you perform is generally based on the results of the previous tests. The Framework for Exploratory Testing (FfET) consists of four key activities that I use when performing ET. They help turn the “I wish I knew” into “Here’s exactly what I did.” They let me explain my thought processes to others and allow me to train others to become better exploratory testers. The key activities are: • WHERE ARE WE? (WAW)—in which we track our progress with information checkpoints Key Phrase—Collation: “Collect your thoughts.” Activity—Before, during, and after a test we examine what we know, what we have discovered, and what we want to follow up on. This can be done before we start testing or when summarizing what we have discovered about the application. It can include things to examine in more detail, including recording defects. • WHAT HAPPENS WHEN (WHW)—in which we confirm by experimentation Key Phrase 1—Experimentation: “Does it work this way?” Activity 1—Leverage knowledge of 30 the patterns, domains, and models in the application to predict results of major actions. Key Phrase 2—Error Guessing: “Does it fail this way?” Activity 2—Leverage knowledge of failure models to make educated guesses of where defects might be located or use known defects to look for others. • WATCH, LEARN, AND LEVERAGE (WLL)—in which we discover by observing ble-popping test session. This application has one main flow, so discovery by searching is not applicable in this case. TEST 1 WAW—I have a charter to “investigate the virtual bubble wrap popper.” There is apparently no documentation for the program. When I start the application, it appears to be a photorealistic representation of bubble wrap. There are no menus or icons apart from a Quit button and a large “Click to pop!” icon. There is no keyboard interaction, just mouse control. I presume it is a typical point-and-click user interface. Normally, I’d start with a “watch, learn, leverage” activity, but in this case the “Click to pop!” icon offers a big clue. WHW—When I click the indicated bubble, it should pop. It does. I see and hear the pop. I put “Start by not clicking ‘Click to pop!’ icon” on my session to-do list because I want to try that later. WHW—I click my choice of bubbles and note that the “Click to pop!” icon disappears. I click a bubble near the middle. It should pop, and it does. WAW—I have twice observed a pattern of popping a single bubble, so based on this, I extend from two instances to a general model of all the bubbles. This is a simulation of bubble wrap that lets us pop unpopped bubbles at random. WLL—I continue popping. As anticipated, I hear and see each bubble pop. Assorted messages—such as “Aren’t you supposed to be working?”—appear at different times as I pop bubbles. After I have popped for a while, the message “Click here if your boss comes by” and a button labeled “BOSS!” appear. WC—I could continue popping or choose to push the “BOSS!” button. Let’s go with the button. I put “ignore ‘BOSS!’ button” on my session to-do list for a later test. WHW—I press the “BOSS!” button. I assume that something else will appear to hide what I am doing, presumably a spreadsheet or a document. No, something very unexpected happens (try it yourself to find out). Key Phrase—Observation: “Discover what it does.” Activity—Observe a specific part of the application by using it, looking for patterns, and trying to identify models (deep observation) or search the application to discover functionality and domains (ranges of values, etc.) to determine what to test (wide observation). • WISE CHOICE (WC)—in which we focus our investigations Key Phrase—Direction: “Determine which way to go.” Activity—When a significant choice is made in testing the application, we note it so we can retrace our tracks. We may record other choices on a to-do list for later investigation. We also need to choose when to end the current testing path and try something else. Using the Four Key FfET Activities Let’s consider an example test session. If you perform an Internet search for “bossmonster bubble pop,” you’ll find a cute, virtual bubble-pop application (or you can visit the StickyNotes for a link). It needs the Flash player to run, but most browsers have that installed. Here are the notes from my first bubwww.StickyMinds.com BETTER SOFTWARE NOVEMBER 2007 http://www.StickyMinds.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Better Software - November 2007

Better Software - November 2007 Contents MarkYour Calendar Technically Speaking What’s Happening @StickyMinds.com Code Craft Test Connection Management Chronicles The Measure of a Management System Behind the Scenes A Story About User Stories and Test-Driven Development Product Announcements The Last Word Ad Index

Better Software - November 2007

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.