Skip to main content

A Review of Mockito

For this week’s blog on quality assurance, I wanted to review what we learned most recently in class. I decided to watch a relatively short (24 min) tutorial on Mockito. It has been over a week since I’ve seen it, and there’s another few days until we meet again. I could use the refresher before then.

The tutorial I chose to watch was by a YouTuber named Walter Schilling. I thought he explained the concept very well. I will definitely bookmark his page for other concepts that I find challenging.

I thought it was a little bit of a complicated set up. I don’t think it was necessary to see the UML diagrams or as extensive of a walkthrough of how his code worked. He didn’t go excessively in depth, but I understood it pretty well after he gave a  demonstration of the final code in action. (He typed in some inputs and showed what the output would be.) I didn’t need to know as much information on his example code. That’s not what I had come to see.

When he got to the mockito section, I was surprised at how little there seemed to be to it. I remember when we went over it in class, I didn’t think it was a very difficult concept, but I probably could not have done it without a little bit of review. After watching this tutorial, I have renewed my confidence that I am able to do it again.

I could see how someone might not like that his method wasn't polished and rehearsed. He would say something such as, "Why is that giving me an error,” or "I don't think I spelled [my variable name] correctly." It didn't take him long to diagnose any of these problems. I kind of liked this style. It gave me more confidence in my own abilities when I could sometimes diagnose something as quick if not quicker than he did on his own example. (To be fair though, most of them were simple fixes.)

Towards the end of his video, all of his tests were failing, and he couldn’t figure out why for a moment. Something small that I gleaned from this is that no matter how good you get, no one is ever perfect. I have a habit of putting myself down for not knowing everything or making simple mistakes. I should not be quite so hard on myself. Even the experts make mistakes. You could go one step further and say that if they never made mistakes, they would never learn from them and become experts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PgH0PwgEa8

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Shailesh Rao on Quality Assurance

In this episode (number 219) of “Test Talks,” I was able to hear Shailesh Rao’s insight into having quality software. He compared it to a “paper-free office” or a “stress-free life,” both worthy goals, but are hard to achieve. They can be strived towards, but it is near impossible to get it 100%. He brought up the issues that bad software can pose to potentially millions of users. Bad software can open the doors to hackers, who might be able to take down websites like Twitter or Reddit. Also, it might stop airlines from being able to function — an annoyance to most, but Mr. Rao asked, “what if there was time-sensitive and lifesaving medicine onboard?” I found this podcast brought up some aspects that I had not thought of before when if comes to quality assurance. I suppose that I’ve thought about the various things he brought up, but as a consumer and never as a creator of the software. A very thought-provoking topic brought up was the fickleness of consumers. They don’t have the...
Post a Comment
Read more

Testing: Like Destroying Sandcastles

https://joecolantonio.com/testtalks/223-testing-dream-journaling-smashing-sand-castles-with-noemi-ferrera/ In this blog for software quality assurance and testing, I decided to return to the “Test Talks” podcast, presented by Joe Colantonio, for another episode (#223). In it, he sat down with Noemi Ferrera, a software tester for a Chinese mobile gaming company to get her take on the subject. Noemi gave a few interesting metaphors that I appreciated for how to look at testing. In one, she gave the example of going to a movie where you had already read the book. It was different than how you imagined it while reading it, and testing is a way of making the “movie version” fit the way you envisioned it playing out.  The other metaphor for testing that she gave was, if you were children at the beach, the developers would be the ones building the sandcastles, whereas the testers would be the ones destroying them. I don’t know if that would be the most accurate way of lookin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Decorator Design Pattern

For this week's blog on Software Design, I decided to watch a short tutorial on one of the design patterns I didn't pick for a previous assignment. I picked Proxy Design pattern to cover before, and now I'm going back to learn about Decorator Design Pattern. It is only a thirteen minute video, so I won't be going as deep as I would had I picked it for the assignment. I am also going to talk about my reflections on it rather than create a tutorial, so I am not going to reteach it to the person reading this blog post. The tutorial I chose was made by Derek Banas on YouTube. He used an example of a pizza parlor to illustrate the wrong way to code it by using inheritance. He shows the problem with this because you would have to create a very large number of subclasses for all your objects (in this case pizzas). Composition, on the other hand, is a dynamic way of modifying objects. Instead of creating as many subclasses, you add functionality at run time. It has th...
Post a Comment
Read more