http://www.sdtimes.com/fullcolumn/column-20070615-02.html
The ability to run unit tests as part of the integrity validation of the codebase is, of course, an important feature. However, there is little that can tell the developer or the manager whether the tests are any good. Even high levels of code coverage are no proxy for test quality (quantity, yes - but not quality). One tool that helps identify weaknesses in unit test coverage is Jester (jester.sourceforge.net). It represents a malicious idea that beneficially mutilates your code. Once your code runs JUnit tests cleanly, Jester will change one meaningful thing in your code, recompile it and rerun your unit tests. If the tests still run cleanly, Jester points out that a unit test is needed. If the tests fail, Jester moves on to another tweak. Given a long enough run, Jester will find lots of seams in your code that are not covered by tests. This will enable you to spot naked code that was not tested for an unforeseen eventuality. If your code can stand up to multiple Jester runs, chances are good you’re correctly testing all the behaviors you need to be checking. Versions of Jester exist for Python (Pester) and C# (Nester). http://jester.sourceforge.net/ Too bad it isn't available for Perl. (Some Perl old timers seem to dismiss concerns over eroding market share, but this is one of the real world examples of where Perl suffers as a result of declining interest.) -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA "Enterprise solutions through open source." Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/ _______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
