In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts on a recent article I read from the Software Testing Help website, which can be found here. The piece really struck me because it reinforced many of the ideas I’ve come to believe about the role of testing in the software development lifecycle, particularly how automation can improve both speed and quality. I’ve always been a fan of automated testing, but this article helped me think more deeply about how it should fit into the broader testing strategy.

One of the key points in the article was the idea of balancing automation with manual testing. While automation is critical for repetitive tasks and quick feedback, the author pointed out that certain aspects of testing—like user experience—cannot be fully captured by automated scripts. This really resonated with me, as I’ve encountered situations where automation was great for catching functional issues, but it missed some of the nuance that a manual tester might be able to identify or spot. I think it’s a reminder that we should never rely too heavily on automation, and that human insight still has an important role to play.

In my own experience, automated testing has been a huge time-saver, especially for regression testing. It helps ensure that previously working functionality remains intact as new features are added. But I’ve also seen the limitations, particularly when automated tests don’t cover edge cases or fail to reflect real-world scenarios. I’ve learned that a good testing strategy needs to integrate both approaches—automation for efficiency and manual testing for critical thinking and creativity. I’ve gotten in the habit of mentally doing a once over to make sure that all my automated tests still cover everything I can think of, instead of just blindly assuming they do.

The article also emphasized the importance of writing testable code to support automation. This is something I think I can improve on in my own work. By considering testability from the start, we can avoid technical debt and create more maintainable, reliable systems. Writing code with testing in mind encourages good design practices and ensures that automated tests are effective.

Lastly, the article touched on continuous integration (CI) and how automated tests play a vital role in CI pipelines. This is something I’ve been trying to implement more consistently, and I’m seeing the value of catching bugs early, before they make it to production. It’s a mindset of constant improvement that aligns well with the idea of being a “Software Apprentice”—always refining and enhancing our process.

In conclusion, this article reaffirmed the importance of finding the right balance between automated and manual testing. As I continue my journey as a developer, I’ll be more mindful of how I integrate both into my workflow to ensure quality and efficiency.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

 In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts on a recent article I read from the Software Testing Help website, which can be found here. The piece really struck me because it reinforced many of the ideas I’ve come to believe about the role of testing in the software development lifecycle, particularly how automation can improve both speed and quality. I’ve always been a fan of automated testing, but this article helped me think more deeply about how it should fit into the broader testing strategy.

One of the key points in the article was the idea of balancing automation with manual testing. While automation is critical for repetitive tasks and quick feedback, the author pointed out that certain aspects of testing—like user experience—cannot be fully captured by automated scripts. This really resonated with me, as I’ve encountered situations where automation was great for catching functional issues, but it missed some of the nuance that a manual tester might be able to identify or spot. I think it’s a reminder that we should never rely too heavily on automation, and that human insight still has an important role to play.

In my own experience, automated testing has been a huge time-saver, especially for regression testing. It helps ensure that previously working functionality remains intact as new features are added. But I’ve also seen the limitations, particularly when automated tests don’t cover edge cases or fail to reflect real-world scenarios. I’ve learned that a good testing strategy needs to integrate both approaches—automation for efficiency and manual testing for critical thinking and creativity. I’ve gotten in the habit of mentally doing a once over to make sure that all my automated tests still cover everything I can think of, instead of just blindly assuming they do.

The article also emphasized the importance of writing testable code to support automation. This is something I think I can improve on in my own work. By considering testability from the start, we can avoid technical debt and create more maintainable, reliable systems. Writing code with testing in mind encourages good design practices and ensures that automated tests are effective.

Lastly, the article touched on continuous integration (CI) and how automated tests play a vital role in CI pipelines. This is something I’ve been trying to implement more consistently, and I’m seeing the value of catching bugs early, before they make it to production. It’s a mindset of constant improvement that aligns well with the idea of being a “Software Apprentice”—always refining and enhancing our process.

In conclusion, this article reaffirmed the importance of finding the right balance between automated and manual testing. As I continue my journey as a developer, I’ll be more mindful of how I integrate both into my workflow to ensure quality and efficiency.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

 In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts on a recent article I read from the Software Testing Help website, which can be found here. The piece really struck me because it reinforced many of the ideas I’ve come to believe about the role of testing in the software development lifecycle, particularly how automation can improve both speed and quality. I’ve always been a fan of automated testing, but this article helped me think more deeply about how it should fit into the broader testing strategy.

One of the key points in the article was the idea of balancing automation with manual testing. While automation is critical for repetitive tasks and quick feedback, the author pointed out that certain aspects of testing—like user experience—cannot be fully captured by automated scripts. This really resonated with me, as I’ve encountered situations where automation was great for catching functional issues, but it missed some of the nuance that a manual tester might be able to identify or spot. I think it’s a reminder that we should never rely too heavily on automation, and that human insight still has an important role to play.

In my own experience, automated testing has been a huge time-saver, especially for regression testing. It helps ensure that previously working functionality remains intact as new features are added. But I’ve also seen the limitations, particularly when automated tests don’t cover edge cases or fail to reflect real-world scenarios. I’ve learned that a good testing strategy needs to integrate both approaches—automation for efficiency and manual testing for critical thinking and creativity. I’ve gotten in the habit of mentally doing a once over to make sure that all my automated tests still cover everything I can think of, instead of just blindly assuming they do.

The article also emphasized the importance of writing testable code to support automation. This is something I think I can improve on in my own work. By considering testability from the start, we can avoid technical debt and create more maintainable, reliable systems. Writing code with testing in mind encourages good design practices and ensures that automated tests are effective.

Lastly, the article touched on continuous integration (CI) and how automated tests play a vital role in CI pipelines. This is something I’ve been trying to implement more consistently, and I’m seeing the value of catching bugs early, before they make it to production. It’s a mindset of constant improvement that aligns well with the idea of being a “Software Apprentice”—always refining and enhancing our process.

In conclusion, this article reaffirmed the importance of finding the right balance between automated and manual testing. As I continue my journey as a developer, I’ll be more mindful of how I integrate both into my workflow to ensure quality and efficiency.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

 In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts on a recent article I read from the Software Testing Help website, which can be found here. The piece really struck me because it reinforced many of the ideas I’ve come to believe about the role of testing in the software development lifecycle, particularly how automation can improve both speed and quality. I’ve always been a fan of automated testing, but this article helped me think more deeply about how it should fit into the broader testing strategy.

One of the key points in the article was the idea of balancing automation with manual testing. While automation is critical for repetitive tasks and quick feedback, the author pointed out that certain aspects of testing—like user experience—cannot be fully captured by automated scripts. This really resonated with me, as I’ve encountered situations where automation was great for catching functional issues, but it missed some of the nuance that a manual tester might be able to identify or spot. I think it’s a reminder that we should never rely too heavily on automation, and that human insight still has an important role to play.

In my own experience, automated testing has been a huge time-saver, especially for regression testing. It helps ensure that previously working functionality remains intact as new features are added. But I’ve also seen the limitations, particularly when automated tests don’t cover edge cases or fail to reflect real-world scenarios. I’ve learned that a good testing strategy needs to integrate both approaches—automation for efficiency and manual testing for critical thinking and creativity. I’ve gotten in the habit of mentally doing a once over to make sure that all my automated tests still cover everything I can think of, instead of just blindly assuming they do.

The article also emphasized the importance of writing testable code to support automation. This is something I think I can improve on in my own work. By considering testability from the start, we can avoid technical debt and create more maintainable, reliable systems. Writing code with testing in mind encourages good design practices and ensures that automated tests are effective.

Lastly, the article touched on continuous integration (CI) and how automated tests play a vital role in CI pipelines. This is something I’ve been trying to implement more consistently, and I’m seeing the value of catching bugs early, before they make it to production. It’s a mindset of constant improvement that aligns well with the idea of being a “Software Apprentice”—always refining and enhancing our process.

In conclusion, this article reaffirmed the importance of finding the right balance between automated and manual testing. As I continue my journey as a developer, I’ll be more mindful of how I integrate both into my workflow to ensure quality and efficiency.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

 In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts on a recent article I read from the Software Testing Help website, which can be found here. The piece really struck me because it reinforced many of the ideas I’ve come to believe about the role of testing in the software development lifecycle, particularly how automation can improve both speed and quality. I’ve always been a fan of automated testing, but this article helped me think more deeply about how it should fit into the broader testing strategy.

One of the key points in the article was the idea of balancing automation with manual testing. While automation is critical for repetitive tasks and quick feedback, the author pointed out that certain aspects of testing—like user experience—cannot be fully captured by automated scripts. This really resonated with me, as I’ve encountered situations where automation was great for catching functional issues, but it missed some of the nuance that a manual tester might be able to identify or spot. I think it’s a reminder that we should never rely too heavily on automation, and that human insight still has an important role to play.

In my own experience, automated testing has been a huge time-saver, especially for regression testing. It helps ensure that previously working functionality remains intact as new features are added. But I’ve also seen the limitations, particularly when automated tests don’t cover edge cases or fail to reflect real-world scenarios. I’ve learned that a good testing strategy needs to integrate both approaches—automation for efficiency and manual testing for critical thinking and creativity. I’ve gotten in the habit of mentally doing a once over to make sure that all my automated tests still cover everything I can think of, instead of just blindly assuming they do.

The article also emphasized the importance of writing testable code to support automation. This is something I think I can improve on in my own work. By considering testability from the start, we can avoid technical debt and create more maintainable, reliable systems. Writing code with testing in mind encourages good design practices and ensures that automated tests are effective.

Lastly, the article touched on continuous integration (CI) and how automated tests play a vital role in CI pipelines. This is something I’ve been trying to implement more consistently, and I’m seeing the value of catching bugs early, before they make it to production. It’s a mindset of constant improvement that aligns well with the idea of being a “Software Apprentice”—always refining and enhancing our process.

In conclusion, this article reaffirmed the importance of finding the right balance between automated and manual testing. As I continue my journey as a developer, I’ll be more mindful of how I integrate both into my workflow to ensure quality and efficiency.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

 In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts on a recent article I read from the Software Testing Help website, which can be found here. The piece really struck me because it reinforced many of the ideas I’ve come to believe about the role of testing in the software development lifecycle, particularly how automation can improve both speed and quality. I’ve always been a fan of automated testing, but this article helped me think more deeply about how it should fit into the broader testing strategy.

One of the key points in the article was the idea of balancing automation with manual testing. While automation is critical for repetitive tasks and quick feedback, the author pointed out that certain aspects of testing—like user experience—cannot be fully captured by automated scripts. This really resonated with me, as I’ve encountered situations where automation was great for catching functional issues, but it missed some of the nuance that a manual tester might be able to identify or spot. I think it’s a reminder that we should never rely too heavily on automation, and that human insight still has an important role to play.

In my own experience, automated testing has been a huge time-saver, especially for regression testing. It helps ensure that previously working functionality remains intact as new features are added. But I’ve also seen the limitations, particularly when automated tests don’t cover edge cases or fail to reflect real-world scenarios. I’ve learned that a good testing strategy needs to integrate both approaches—automation for efficiency and manual testing for critical thinking and creativity. I’ve gotten in the habit of mentally doing a once over to make sure that all my automated tests still cover everything I can think of, instead of just blindly assuming they do.

The article also emphasized the importance of writing testable code to support automation. This is something I think I can improve on in my own work. By considering testability from the start, we can avoid technical debt and create more maintainable, reliable systems. Writing code with testing in mind encourages good design practices and ensures that automated tests are effective.

Lastly, the article touched on continuous integration (CI) and how automated tests play a vital role in CI pipelines. This is something I’ve been trying to implement more consistently, and I’m seeing the value of catching bugs early, before they make it to production. It’s a mindset of constant improvement that aligns well with the idea of being a “Software Apprentice”—always refining and enhancing our process.

In conclusion, this article reaffirmed the importance of finding the right balance between automated and manual testing. As I continue my journey as a developer, I’ll be more mindful of how I integrate both into my workflow to ensure quality and efficiency.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts primarily on Chapter 1 of Apprenticeship Patterns, a book I had to read parts of for another class. I really like the idea of being a “Software Apprentice,” as I think it is a good representation of the attitude I have adopted over the years. I’ve always viewed myself as someone who is constantly learning and evolving in this field, and the apprenticeship model seems to align perfectly with that. It’s not about arriving at some endpoint but about growing, making mistakes, and improving.

What stood out to me the most was the idea of viewing the development process as a journey, not a destination. Chapter 1 introduces the concept of “Software Craftsmanship” as more than just technical skill, but also as a mindset of continuous learning. This was particularly thought-provoking because I think there’s a tendency, especially early in our careers, to think of coding as a task to be completed or a skill to be mastered and then moved beyond while in pursuit of some computer science career. However, the idea that becoming a Software Craftsman is an ongoing process—a commitment to constant improvement and a mindset that thrives on learning—is something that I think is a better description. It shifted my perspective on what it means to be good at coding- it’s not enough to know how to do something today, it’s about always finding a way to improve your code in the future.

In the past, specifically in my career, I’ve often gotten caught up in the day-to-day rush of just getting whatever piece of code done. I’ve rushed to get things coded, with the focus being on completing projects rather than developing deeper expertise or refining my approach to coding. After reading this chapter, I think I’m more likely to focus on the long-term value of writing quality code and the importance of standards. It’s not just about writing code that works; it’s about writing code that lasts, is readable, and contributes to a more sustainable project. I’m going to start to approach my coding tasks with a deeper goal, rather than rushing through them for the sake of completion.

I think this is particularly applicable to Software Quality Assurance and Testing because QA is, in essence, a form of ensuring that our code is always improving. Not only do we need to find a balance between constantly improving before release and actually releasing, but even after releases, we still need to be looking for future requirements and improvements. There is no end in sight for software testing, ever. I think this constant forward motion, driven by constantly increasing requirements, is inseparable from the idea of being a software apprentice.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts primarily on Chapter 1 of Apprenticeship Patterns, a book I had to read parts of for another class. I really like the idea of being a “Software Apprentice,” as I think it is a good representation of the attitude I have adopted over the years. I’ve always viewed myself as someone who is constantly learning and evolving in this field, and the apprenticeship model seems to align perfectly with that. It’s not about arriving at some endpoint but about growing, making mistakes, and improving.

What stood out to me the most was the idea of viewing the development process as a journey, not a destination. Chapter 1 introduces the concept of “Software Craftsmanship” as more than just technical skill, but also as a mindset of continuous learning. This was particularly thought-provoking because I think there’s a tendency, especially early in our careers, to think of coding as a task to be completed or a skill to be mastered and then moved beyond while in pursuit of some computer science career. However, the idea that becoming a Software Craftsman is an ongoing process—a commitment to constant improvement and a mindset that thrives on learning—is something that I think is a better description. It shifted my perspective on what it means to be good at coding- it’s not enough to know how to do something today, it’s about always finding a way to improve your code in the future.

In the past, specifically in my career, I’ve often gotten caught up in the day-to-day rush of just getting whatever piece of code done. I’ve rushed to get things coded, with the focus being on completing projects rather than developing deeper expertise or refining my approach to coding. After reading this chapter, I think I’m more likely to focus on the long-term value of writing quality code and the importance of standards. It’s not just about writing code that works; it’s about writing code that lasts, is readable, and contributes to a more sustainable project. I’m going to start to approach my coding tasks with a deeper goal, rather than rushing through them for the sake of completion.

I think this is particularly applicable to Software Quality Assurance and Testing because QA is, in essence, a form of ensuring that our code is always improving. Not only do we need to find a balance between constantly improving before release and actually releasing, but even after releases, we still need to be looking for future requirements and improvements. There is no end in sight for software testing, ever. I think this constant forward motion, driven by constantly increasing requirements, is inseparable from the idea of being a software apprentice.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts primarily on Chapter 1 of Apprenticeship Patterns, a book I had to read parts of for another class. I really like the idea of being a “Software Apprentice,” as I think it is a good representation of the attitude I have adopted over the years. I’ve always viewed myself as someone who is constantly learning and evolving in this field, and the apprenticeship model seems to align perfectly with that. It’s not about arriving at some endpoint but about growing, making mistakes, and improving.

What stood out to me the most was the idea of viewing the development process as a journey, not a destination. Chapter 1 introduces the concept of “Software Craftsmanship” as more than just technical skill, but also as a mindset of continuous learning. This was particularly thought-provoking because I think there’s a tendency, especially early in our careers, to think of coding as a task to be completed or a skill to be mastered and then moved beyond while in pursuit of some computer science career. However, the idea that becoming a Software Craftsman is an ongoing process—a commitment to constant improvement and a mindset that thrives on learning—is something that I think is a better description. It shifted my perspective on what it means to be good at coding- it’s not enough to know how to do something today, it’s about always finding a way to improve your code in the future.

In the past, specifically in my career, I’ve often gotten caught up in the day-to-day rush of just getting whatever piece of code done. I’ve rushed to get things coded, with the focus being on completing projects rather than developing deeper expertise or refining my approach to coding. After reading this chapter, I think I’m more likely to focus on the long-term value of writing quality code and the importance of standards. It’s not just about writing code that works; it’s about writing code that lasts, is readable, and contributes to a more sustainable project. I’m going to start to approach my coding tasks with a deeper goal, rather than rushing through them for the sake of completion.

I think this is particularly applicable to Software Quality Assurance and Testing because QA is, in essence, a form of ensuring that our code is always improving. Not only do we need to find a balance between constantly improving before release and actually releasing, but even after releases, we still need to be looking for future requirements and improvements. There is no end in sight for software testing, ever. I think this constant forward motion, driven by constantly increasing requirements, is inseparable from the idea of being a software apprentice.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

In this post, I’ll be discussing my thoughts primarily on Chapter 1 of Apprenticeship Patterns, a book I had to read parts of for another class. I really like the idea of being a “Software Apprentice,” as I think it is a good representation of the attitude I have adopted over the years. I’ve always viewed myself as someone who is constantly learning and evolving in this field, and the apprenticeship model seems to align perfectly with that. It’s not about arriving at some endpoint but about growing, making mistakes, and improving.

What stood out to me the most was the idea of viewing the development process as a journey, not a destination. Chapter 1 introduces the concept of “Software Craftsmanship” as more than just technical skill, but also as a mindset of continuous learning. This was particularly thought-provoking because I think there’s a tendency, especially early in our careers, to think of coding as a task to be completed or a skill to be mastered and then moved beyond while in pursuit of some computer science career. However, the idea that becoming a Software Craftsman is an ongoing process—a commitment to constant improvement and a mindset that thrives on learning—is something that I think is a better description. It shifted my perspective on what it means to be good at coding- it’s not enough to know how to do something today, it’s about always finding a way to improve your code in the future.

In the past, specifically in my career, I’ve often gotten caught up in the day-to-day rush of just getting whatever piece of code done. I’ve rushed to get things coded, with the focus being on completing projects rather than developing deeper expertise or refining my approach to coding. After reading this chapter, I think I’m more likely to focus on the long-term value of writing quality code and the importance of standards. It’s not just about writing code that works; it’s about writing code that lasts, is readable, and contributes to a more sustainable project. I’m going to start to approach my coding tasks with a deeper goal, rather than rushing through them for the sake of completion.

I think this is particularly applicable to Software Quality Assurance and Testing because QA is, in essence, a form of ensuring that our code is always improving. Not only do we need to find a balance between constantly improving before release and actually releasing, but even after releases, we still need to be looking for future requirements and improvements. There is no end in sight for software testing, ever. I think this constant forward motion, driven by constantly increasing requirements, is inseparable from the idea of being a software apprentice.

From the blog Mr. Lancer 987's Blog by Mr. Lancer 987 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.