Hello, this is a talk about overtesting, which is a very, you can probably understand what it is from the name, but it's a simple technique you can use to improve your test suites, improve your testing proficiency, so it's a model for thinking about your testing, really.
And this talk is aimed at developers, but it's also useful for QA engineers, QA teams who want to maybe discuss with their developers their testing strategies, their testing ideas.
So key question by overtesting, and this might be really obvious, but how much time do you spend maintaining your test suites versus your application code? A lot of my clients I've worked with, their problem isn't under testing, they're not testing too few of their use cases, they're actually testing a lot. And so what they end up doing is spending most of their time, I've observed this, up to 75% of their time or more in their test code, making the code changes to their application to add new features or fix bugs, but then having to go back and fix the tests, all these broken tests everywhere.
75% is too much. I love tests, I'm writing test left, right and center, but I'm not wanting to spend my life in the tests. I want to be at least in a situation where I'm spending an equal amount of time on both. And maybe even less, maybe I can be spending less time on my test suites, but still maintaining 100% coverage, for example. So, I'm not going to suggest what that number should be, but if you're kind of in this 75% territory, and you can think about whether you are personally and on your team, but you probably want to be moving down to improve your productivity.
So, here's a simple question. The top screenshot is showing GitHub workflow that's running a pull request. So, I'm sure a lot of you will be familiar with this setup. The red X is showing that CI has failed. So, continuous integration. Like I said, I don't see teams that don't have CI. I think most people are writing tests. Problem isn't under testing, it's over testing. So, to me, this question is key. How many automated tests do you need for CI to fail? The answer is just one. You need one test. So, ideally, whatever change you could make, if there was an issue with that piece of code you've written, just one test would fail because that's all you need to raise the flag and stop your pull request being merged. This is an ideal scenario. I don't think you'd ever get to one. But if you think about the times that this does happen, how many tests are failing for you? Are you in this scenario where multiple test suites are failing, hundreds of tests are failing because of a simple change you made? And this is the scenario where you then start spending that 75% of time fixing your test. So, over testing, very simply, you have too many tests, telling you the same thing. I'm gonna show a very quick example. There's plenty of examples of this. This is one I see a lot, where people are kind of doing scenario-based testing. And what they'll do is they'll set up the test and they'll print out the� they'll have an expectation for the entire response or payload that they've got here. So, this example is just calling fetch and I'm checking the method, credentials, headers, and the body.
Comments