|
|
|
|
|
by Xen0byte
1721 days ago
|
|
Firstly, I stopped taking this article seriously at "modern language (Java)". Apart from that, "we can decide to not put bugs in the code" is the most non-sensical thing I've ever read. OK, sure, you can eventually flush some or most bugs out before your code goes in for proper testing from formally-trained QA people, but unless all you're writing is "Hello World" applications or walking skeletons then writing bug-free code is not possible, hence the existance of an entire industry that revolves around finding bugs. Just because YOU can't find any more bugs in your own code, that doesn't mean there aren't any bugs in the code, which is why QA people are trained to employ methodical test techniques. This is commonly known as the "Absence-Of-Errors Fallacy". Secondly, there's this concept called "Independence Of Testing", which essentially states that the more independent the tester is from the code, the more likely they are to find defects. The opposite of that is also true, the less independend the tester is, e.g. if the tester is the developer, then the less likely they are to find defects in their own code. Read mode here (section 5.1.1): https://www.istqb.org/downloads/send/2-foundation-level-docu... Lastly, this article is essentially saying that proper testing by QA people is useless, which not only I strongly disagree with but also is something that a terrible developer would say. |
|
But the innovation Java brought is larger than what younger languages bring to the table. You can still dislike the language of course.