|
snorkie wrote: When I used an image of Darth Vader for the CEO and he saw it
Surely you're considered a living legend by the proles? 
snorkie wrote: The whole IT department got reprimanded once it was found.
Worth it!
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
That's hilarious. If I was the CEO I'd have a good chuckle and go about my business (literally). Shame he didn't have a sense of humor 
|
|
|
|
|
C-level execs (sociopaths) never do.
|
|
|
|
|
No humour.
My boss would demand the full size original of the picture.
|
|
|
|
|
Must have been too close to reality for his comfort.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
Funny thing is that he was one of the best owners I have ever worked for. He knew everyone by name (about 170 employees when I left) and would talk to anybody in the halls.
Hogan
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Do you make test data fun?
..I have learned to first check what the test-data is being used for. If it can end up in a presentation to the customer or the boss, some jokes can be, ehrm.. unprofessional.
But yes, there's often a Bacon Ipsum in each multiline textfield. When creating test-data, I use a fantasized company that insures broom-sticks (complete with logo's ofcourse). The added bonus of reserving for Narnia or Mordor is that when an order actually accidentally makes it to production, it is (hopefully!) easily recognizeale as nonsense-data. So yes, next to humor it is also defendable as being usefull.
Sander Rossel wrote: I know some people, especially customers, need test data to be "the real thing".
How 'real' is data? And what data is involved? Do take into account that it may have some privacy-implications if you are going to use a copy of 'real data', like that it may need to be anonymized.
Remember, security starts with paranoia 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: The added bonus of reserving for Narnia or Mordor is that when an order actually accidentally makes it to production, it is (hopefully!) easily recognizeale as nonsense-data
Or a lawsuit for lots of spilled fuel! 
Eddy Vluggen wrote: How 'real' is data?
I used to work for meat processing companies (yes, as a vegetarian, I know...) so they had a product, like tenderloin, that I would use for testing. So whenever the customer tried to explain what he wanted and we looked at some test data together he would laugh at me for putting a tenderloin in an order by some French customer that never orders tenderloin and then having it shipped by some Russian transporter (while the customer was in France).
I really don't care what customer I ship too, or what transporter delivers the goods, none of that mattered for the test, but he just couldn't work like that.
So yeah, he'd recreate nearly every test case we had so it fit a real world scenario, whether it was important for the test or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: So whenever the customer tried to explain what he wanted
Hehe, made me think of this[^] site, but be warned, it can be a time-waster 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
The best test data would probably include a large set of historical data. If your app doesn't cater for historical data, make it, and avoid all the guesswork on what to initially test with.
|
|
|
|
|
My test data is somewhat dry and flat, but my bugs are of the best quality... there are tears...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: but my bugs are of the best quality
Somehow I read "drugs" instead of "bugs"... 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: but my bugs are of the best quality
Somehow I read "drugs" instead of "bugs"..
No you didn't, but Kornfeld just edited his post real quick.
And as far as quality goes, I can assure you the man stocks some pretty classy stuff. 
|
|
|
|
|
Not only test data. Years ago I worked for a company that archived documents. The documents were archived on CDs by robots, along with a viewer to view them when needed. I had to add two menu items, one to activate the toolbar and one to make it disappear.
Instead of naming them 'Toolbar ein' and 'Toolbar aus', I named them 'Einbartool' and 'Ausbartool', just for fun. Then we got the news that the UN wanted to use the archiving system and they quickly needed the viewer translated to French. They literally ripped it out of my hands as soon a I had written my last line of code and sent it to a translator. A day later we got a mail with the question:
"Qu'est ce que un 'Einbartool'?
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
That's awesome! 
I was particularly bad at French in high school, the language of Mordor... 
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on the project, some I do and some I don't. Typically, for the projects I pull from production to dev/test frequently I don't. But if I'm in the early phases of a project that hasn't seen the light of day yet, I'm more inclined to do so. Also, depends on my mood... and planetary alignment.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know, the data that's on production (where developers test) 
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, the data submitted by the users...
|
|
|
|
|
We recently demonstrated a system to the manager of the primary user having put in test data where we labelled a module "Finance Management". This was a label on a view and we said straight away we could change it to anything he liked. Said manager spent the next 30 minutes explaining why the label was invalid.
He later wrote it up as a problem with the application.
Morale of the story, make you test data nonsense, not something close to reality, even a manager can't focus on nonsense for too long.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: even a manager can't focus on nonsense for too long.
OH! How I wish that were true!
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Ouch, been there once
My guess is that those people are so extremely incompetent, and know it, that whenever they see something new, like "Finance Management", they freak out.
Giving you a thirty minute speech on why the label is invalid is just to verify his own knowledge and position.
Writing it down as a problem makes him feel powerful.
Mycroft Holmes wrote: even a manager can't focus on nonsense for too long
Why do you think that?
Managers made nonsense their job!
|
|
|
|
|
Managers have to be incompetent in order to be promoted out of harms way. I remember one, very senior manager asking me how to make a video player play. I suggested he should press the button with the word 'Play' on it. Blank response. He didn't even recognise sarcasm.
We're philosophical about power outages here. A.C. come, A.C. go.
|
|
|
|
|
Mostly not. But recently I found test data for an application I was working on to mention occupation as terrorist. Don't know who created that but we were scared to deny anything to that particular user.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Generally I use a copy of the real data to make the testing more faithful.
But if I don't have real data and create a mockup, it has to be obvious that the test data is fake so I don't forget to exchange it for real data later, so yes hilarious it is. Or bacon ipsum[^] if I'm lazy.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
