I found the art of testing is more tied to the reality on the ground as opposed to the testing methodology.
1. Do you have a a QA department doing manual or even automated testing?
2. Do you have performance testing?
3. Is the code base large or small?
4. Transactions versus analytics?
5. Social media? Some code doesn't need testing. Facebook doesn't test their code.
Each new project requires a flexibility to understand the reality of time and resources available for testing, the type of application and performance considerations. If one works at a bank or on transactional software then testing needs to verify exactness. If you are working on analytical software then what's another anomaly between friends, errors in your errors, who cares. If you are working on social media then just pump and dump like NodeJS.
That is the art of testing to me. A mind set of one size fits all with respect to the of value unit testing, integration testing, regression testing or manual testing is the opposite of art: it's ideology.
1. Do you have a a QA department doing manual or even automated testing? 2. Do you have performance testing? 3. Is the code base large or small? 4. Transactions versus analytics? 5. Social media? Some code doesn't need testing. Facebook doesn't test their code.
Each new project requires a flexibility to understand the reality of time and resources available for testing, the type of application and performance considerations. If one works at a bank or on transactional software then testing needs to verify exactness. If you are working on analytical software then what's another anomaly between friends, errors in your errors, who cares. If you are working on social media then just pump and dump like NodeJS.
That is the art of testing to me. A mind set of one size fits all with respect to the of value unit testing, integration testing, regression testing or manual testing is the opposite of art: it's ideology.