The Testing Anti-Patterns series explores numerous testing-related missteps, provides tips for identifying and extinguishing them in an existing codebase, and offers strategies for avoiding them altogether on new projects. The series began as a conference presentation (titled How to Fail With 100% Test Coverage), and many of the anti-patterns are now available through the collection of essays below.

Essays

• Incidental Coverage
• Overspecification
• Underspecification
• The Ugly Mirror
• Invisible Code

And while not specific to any one anti-pattern, this post offers a collection of related quotes and resources spanning the last ten years and then some.

How to Fail With 100% Test Coverage

Abstract

With an expressive language such as Ruby or Groovy and with modern test practices, 100% C0 test coverage is readily achievable. But 100% coverage is meaningless without other supporting habits and practices. Over the last few years, we have taken dozens of projects to 100% coverage, and there are still plenty of things that can go wrong:

• Fragile Mocking
• Incidental Coverage
• The Ugly Mirror
• Overspecification
• Slow Tests
• Underspecification
• Shallow Tests
• Invisible Code

We will look at examples of each of these problems, and show how to prevent them from infecting your project.

Presentations

• NFJS - Research Triangle Software Symposium - 06/22/2008 [JR]

• Agile RTP - 07/01/2008 [JR]

• NFJS - Central Ohio Software Symposium - 07/26/2008 [SH]

• erubycon - 08/16/2008 [SH]

• raleigh.rb (mp3) (iTunes) (video) - 08/19/2008 [JR]

• Software Test & Performance Conference - 09/26/2008 [JR]

• NFJS - Twin Cities Software Symposium - 10/11/2008 [SH]

–

For information on other talks and upcoming events, or to schedule an event at your user group, conference, or company, check us out at thinkrelevance.com.