<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Improving testing practices at Google</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/</link>
	<description>Building software that matters</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 07:12:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Episode 7 &#8211; Survivors &#124; Marcelo Costa</title>
		<link>http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/comment-page-1/#comment-83563</link>
		<dc:creator>Episode 7 &#8211; Survivors &#124; Marcelo Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 03:23:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/#comment-83563</guid>
		<description>[...] pick on Mark Striebeck from Google on the usefulness of a unit test(via Luca Minudel), and on the Test Mercenaries (via Gojko [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] pick on Mark Striebeck from Google on the usefulness of a unit test(via Luca Minudel), and on the Test Mercenaries (via Gojko [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karine Sabatier &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Links w#52</title>
		<link>http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/comment-page-1/#comment-69705</link>
		<dc:creator>Karine Sabatier &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Links w#52</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:07:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/#comment-69705</guid>
		<description>[...] Improving testing practices at Google &#8220;Google had a team of Test Mercenaries, who joined different teams for a short period of time to help them with testing.&#8221; Ain&#8217;t it how testing first happens everywhere? That&#8217;s how it started at Eyeka anyway. Tags : [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Improving testing practices at Google &#8220;Google had a team of Test Mercenaries, who joined different teams for a short period of time to help them with testing.&#8221; Ain&#8217;t it how testing first happens everywhere? That&#8217;s how it started at Eyeka anyway. Tags : [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rogério Liesenfeld</title>
		<link>http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/comment-page-1/#comment-69380</link>
		<dc:creator>Rogério Liesenfeld</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:40:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/#comment-69380</guid>
		<description>&quot;The third step will be to provide constructive feedback to developers, telling developers how to improve tests, what tests to write an how to make the code more testable.&quot;

For Java code at least, there is no actual need to &quot;make the code more testable&quot;.
Any piece of Java code can be tested in isolation, given the proper tooling.

You can (and should) make code simpler and therefore easier to understand, change, and test, but production code shouldn&#039;t be made more complex just to satisfy some mocking tool. In other words, don&#039;t confuse intrinsic testability (ie, maintainability) with extrinsic testability, which is a function of the capabilities of the mocking/isolation API used.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The third step will be to provide constructive feedback to developers, telling developers how to improve tests, what tests to write an how to make the code more testable.&#8221;</p>
<p>For Java code at least, there is no actual need to &#8220;make the code more testable&#8221;.<br />
Any piece of Java code can be tested in isolation, given the proper tooling.</p>
<p>You can (and should) make code simpler and therefore easier to understand, change, and test, but production code shouldn&#8217;t be made more complex just to satisfy some mocking tool. In other words, don&#8217;t confuse intrinsic testability (ie, maintainability) with extrinsic testability, which is a function of the capabilities of the mocking/isolation API used.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gil Zilberfeld</title>
		<link>http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/comment-page-1/#comment-69248</link>
		<dc:creator>Gil Zilberfeld</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:21:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/#comment-69248</guid>
		<description>Hi Gojko,

In our latest installment of our webcast &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.typemock.com/this-week-in-test/2009/12/16/episode-7-survivors.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;This week in testing&lt;/a&gt;, we talked about your post (actually on your description of Mark&#039;s presentation). I invite you to check it out, comment and if you really like what you see, and want to see more, spread the word.

Gil Zilberfeld, Typemock</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Gojko,</p>
<p>In our latest installment of our webcast <a href="http://www.typemock.com/this-week-in-test/2009/12/16/episode-7-survivors.html" rel="nofollow">This week in testing</a>, we talked about your post (actually on your description of Mark&#8217;s presentation). I invite you to check it out, comment and if you really like what you see, and want to see more, spread the word.</p>
<p>Gil Zilberfeld, Typemock</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Computer Scientist as Toolsmith &#8211; Fred Brooks at Mark Needham</title>
		<link>http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/comment-page-1/#comment-69170</link>
		<dc:creator>The Computer Scientist as Toolsmith &#8211; Fred Brooks at Mark Needham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:16:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/improving-testing-practices-at-google/#comment-69170</guid>
		<description>[...] seem to be going with an even more automated approach with respect to understanding which tests are useful as Marcus Strie... and since it seems to be working well for them, perhaps we haven&#039;t yet worked out where the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] seem to be going with an even more automated approach with respect to understanding which tests are useful as Marcus Strie&#8230; and since it seems to be working well for them, perhaps we haven&#39;t yet worked out where the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

