This principle (or paradox) came up during my conversations a couple of times lately. Once when evaluating a company’s approach to automation, where they created a large suit of tests and assumed it would continue catching all new bugs for eternity. Another time, working with a different tea...
Testing for the new export functionality will not be enough to catch this bug – you need to validate all existing functionality in other features and that is where automated tests come in most handy.But still – the chances of the test you just coded up finding any bugs after its first ...
Joel Montvelisky is a Co-Founder and Chief Solution Architect at PractiTest. He has been in testing and QA since 1997, working as a tester, QA Manager and Director, and Consultant for companies in Israel, the US, and the EU. Joel is a Forbes council member, and a blogger. In additi...
Inter-Class TestingObject-Oriented System TestingOntologiesPesticide ParadoxTest Cases2022 Little Lion ScientificObject-Oriented System Testing (OOST) focus on issues emerged with Object-Oriented features e.g. encapsulation, polymorphism, inheritance and dynamic binding. Different faults can detect during the...
Pesticide Paradox In this article I will be attempting to explain one of the biggest (or what I feel is the biggest) drawback of traditional automation testing – the phenomenon of product code becoming more resistant to the test code and resulting in less bugs being found over time by the...
For starters, by automation testing, I simply mean a bunch (or suite) of tests which can be kicked off together and which require no manual intervention for running the tests or validating the results of each of the tests. Thus once kicked off, an automation “run” simply gives you a ...