Skip to main content
22 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Mar 30, 2017 at 16:30 history edited candied_orange CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 3 characters in body
Sep 9, 2011 at 3:55 vote accept Saeed Neamati
Aug 22, 2011 at 8:47 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
added 14 characters in body
Aug 21, 2011 at 21:38 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
added 15 characters in body
Aug 21, 2011 at 18:44 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
added 211 characters in body
Aug 21, 2011 at 18:23 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 3 characters in body
Aug 21, 2011 at 18:17 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
added 626 characters in body
Aug 21, 2011 at 17:34 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
edited body
Aug 21, 2011 at 15:43 comment added Falcon @Bryan Oakley: But that's not Q&A testing then.
Aug 21, 2011 at 15:42 comment added Bryan Oakley -1 because I can't agree with the "the time of the developer is too valuable..." statement. If a developer is spending time testing their code in an effort to improve it they are most definitely not wasting their time.
Aug 21, 2011 at 14:49 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
added 74 characters in body
Aug 21, 2011 at 14:24 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 2 characters in body
Aug 21, 2011 at 14:18 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
added 264 characters in body
Aug 21, 2011 at 10:47 comment added Falcon @user10326: Testers actually decrease the costs of the project and increase the quality! Testers are cheaper than developers and can focus on development rather than testing.
Aug 21, 2011 at 10:28 comment added user10326 @falcon:+1 from me but I do not think this answer would be accepteble by upper management which usually is non-technical.How to convince to say no to customer even for last-minute request or increase cost by hire a tester seems really hard task to me
Aug 21, 2011 at 7:55 comment added Falcon @StasM: I agree that developers can be testers, even good ones. But they shouldn't be testers.
Aug 21, 2011 at 0:05 comment added StasM Developers can be testers - and a good developer actually knows many places where code can be weak and subject to breakage. Just never have people test the code they designed or wrote - that's useless. Other people's code may be ok.
Aug 20, 2011 at 18:11 comment added Saeed Neamati @maple_shaft, the solution you mention here is completely proven to be wrong in our team. As Falcon's link says, developers are far more expensive than testers. Thus with the budget a company dedicates for one hour of testing being done by a developer, a tester with 2-4 hours can be hired.
Aug 20, 2011 at 12:30 comment added Falcon @maple_shaft: Imho there's no excuse for not having a tester. Any project will deliver higher quality with a dedicated tester and developers can focus on, well developing if there's one. Having developers test each others code is a makeshift solution, even for small teams imho. You should read Joel's article on it, too.
Aug 20, 2011 at 12:11 comment added maple_shaft Strongly and vehemently disagree... Developers can be highly effective testers but the developer of a feature should NOT also be the tester of the same feature. Many small teams play both roles, by three people working on three different features, then handing off testing to one of the other three developers. It works extremely well when a team does not have a QA tester.
Aug 20, 2011 at 8:21 history edited Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0
edited body
Aug 20, 2011 at 8:01 history answered Falcon CC BY-SA 3.0