Entries for Richard.Hein

Monads [Monads]

Richard.Hein — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:03:47 GMT

I have a question about monads ... if they are really the "fundamental unit of composibility" as put forward in a few of the Channel9 interviews with Brian Beckman and Eric Meijer, then isn't it practical to assume that the goal should then be to ensure that everything is in a monad? Does that actually make sense, and is it even possible?

in reply to Monads

(What? You MUST log in to view Channel 9?? Why??) EDIT: nevermind it's fine [(What? You MUST log in to view Channel 9?? Why??) EDIT: nevermind it's fine]

Richard.Hein — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 03:08:52 GMT

EDIT: Ummm, nevermind. I have no idea why but it was just me. I signed out and tried again and everything's fine. I have no idea why it was redirecting me. I tried it a few times. Sorry. :S

I guess I can't delete a post.

in reply to (What? You MUST log in to view Channel 9?? Why??) EDIT: nevermind it's fine

Unit tests documentation ... for QA? [Unit tests documentation ... for QA?]

Richard.Hein — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:50:38 GMT

Has anyone here been asked to write documentation describing all the unit tests they have done on their code, for QA to review, with pass/fail signoffs on everything?

The reason I ask is because I've never been asked to do this kind of documentation, and it's not even "unit tests" they are asking about, what they really mean is some functional testing done on a web application that covers the use cases, but "not in as much detail" as the QA teams test cases. I sent QA a draft of what I think they wanted, and asked for feedback "because I've never had to write this kind of documentation and I'm not sure if this is what you want", and got back a reply, "I'm surprised that you do not understand ... I'd expect a developer to know what unit tests are and to have done this for all your code in the past" with a CC to my project manager, which was basically trying to make me look bad, and that basic kind of attitude. I replied that our definitions of "unit test" were completely different.... Wondering if there's any opinion, because I am really pissed off right now.

in reply to Unit tests documentation ... for QA?