On 17/07/2013 09:32 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds. All we need now is for
> SpecFlow to implement conditional branching and iteration, and it'll be
> Turing-complete. AND THEN THE WORLD IS NOT SAFE!!
>
> The madness. The madness!!

...sorry about that. I'm back now.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 22:37:45 +0200, Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

> On 17/07/2013 09:32 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds. All we need now is for
>> SpecFlow to implement conditional branching and iteration, and it'll be
>> Turing-complete. AND THEN THE WORLD IS NOT SAFE!!
>>
>> The madness. The madness!!
>
> ...sorry about that. I'm back now.

Create C+ interface that resembles SpecFlow's language...

.. but that would be a bit redundant.

-- 
-Nekar Xenos-

Post a reply to this message

On 17/07/2013 9:32 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> For the past month and a half, I've been working

[snip]

So, you are enjoying your new job, then?

Admit it. We were right, you were wasted in your old one.
Have you heard how your old workmates are getting on and has your father 
found a job yet?

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 17/07/2013 09:56 PM, Stephen wrote:
> So, you are enjoying your new job, then?

Yeah, at the moment it's OK. Sometimes I wish for a little more 
recognition - I just build an entire remote control framework, build a 
test framework on top of that, and then built a SpecFlow library on top 
of that, in addition to cleaning and implementing over 150 tests. I 
doubt anybody else in our office could have made this nice a job of 
it... but maybe I'm just deluding myself.

> Admit it. We were right, you were wasted in your old one.

Oh, I thought I admitted that a long time ago. The contention was 
whether I *could* get another job, not whether I *should*...

> Have you heard how your old workmates are getting on and has your father
> found a job yet?

My dad has a crap dead-end job that pays peanuts and involves an even 
worse commute than the last job. Then again, it beats being unemployed, 
so...

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 22:20:23 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

> On 17/07/2013 09:56 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> So, you are enjoying your new job, then?
> 
> Yeah, at the moment it's OK. Sometimes I wish for a little more
> recognition - I just build an entire remote control framework, build a
> test framework on top of that, and then built a SpecFlow library on top
> of that, in addition to cleaning and implementing over 150 tests. I
> doubt anybody else in our office could have made this nice a job of
> it... but maybe I'm just deluding myself.

I find that particularly in the IT and technical fields, recognition is 
difficult.  Many managers I've worked for even admitted that they sucked 
at it.

I don't think you're deluding yourself - the description you gave of what 
you've been working on is something I understand, but I only know a 
handful of people who could have done it.  Job well done, Andy.

>> Admit it. We were right, you were wasted in your old one.
> 
> Oh, I thought I admitted that a long time ago. The contention was
> whether I *could* get another job, not whether I *should*...

You managed it a few weeks after being laid off.  It took me 4 months to 
find something that is essentially part-time (and 2 years later, I'm 
still doing it).  I've just applied for a position at a very large 
software company, but we'll see how the interview process goes (it's a 
large enough company that you don't talk to their "recruiter community", 
you have a liaison that you work through for a few weeks.  That's a 
liaison to the *recruiters*, not to the hiring managers).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> For the past month and a half, I've been working on performing automated
> testing of our product. Now the product *already* has over one thousand
> unit tests, which test individual components of the application. But as
> any good tester will tell you, you also need integration tests to check
> that the pieces actually fit together correctly.
>
> We do have a guy who's job is to test the software. But one human poking
> buttons at random to see if anything breaks is far slower and less
> systematic than an automated test system. (On the other hand, some tests
> cannot be automated - e.g., you can't write a test that checks that the
> text is legible, hasn't been cut off the edge of the page, etc.)
>
> In short, I've build a system which allows me to remote-control the
> product over the network, and observe its responses. This allows me to
> control the software more or less the way a user would - click this
> button, select that option, check that the correct data is displayed.
>
> I say "build a system" because, after many, many months of fruitless
> Google searching, we discovered that no such system already exists for
> our software platform. If it were a web application, there would be
> trillions of options for testing tools. If it were written in Qt, we
> would have several strong contenders to look at. But it's GTK+, so
> there's essentially nothing. We found a couple of OSS tools which were
> horribly broken, and that is all.
>
> So I looked at the inner working of one of the tools, and ended up
> reimplementing it in C#. And I've spent a month putting all the
> functionality we need into it. Essentially I run my server code in the
> laptop I want to remote control, and run the client from inside Visual
> Studio on my development box. Then I run my test suite, and the tests
> talk to the client, which commands the server to do stuff.

That's obviously totally impossible to actually implement, and there 
must be about one person in the entire world whose job it is to do stuff 
like that. :-)

Post a reply to this message

> Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds. All we need now is for
> SpecFlow to implement conditional branching and iteration, and it'll be
> Turing-complete. AND THEN THE WORLD IS NOT SAFE!!

...unless you reimplemented it all in Haskell :-)

Post a reply to this message

On 18/07/2013 08:35 AM, scott wrote:
>> Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds. All we need now is for
>> SpecFlow to implement conditional branching and iteration, and it'll be
>> Turing-complete. AND THEN THE WORLD IS NOT SAFE!!
>
> ...unless you reimplemented it all in Haskell :-)

You laugh, but that's not so implausible. In fact, I posit that the 
hardest part would be turning it into a VS plugin... actually parsing 
Gherkin and generating code from it should be trivial for just about any 
programming language. (Except Bash, because that isn't a real 
programming language...)

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 18 Jul 2013 08:22:15 +0100, scott wrote:

> That's obviously totally impossible to actually implement, and there
> must be about one person in the entire world whose job it is to do stuff
> like that. :-)

Damn, now I need a new keyboard ;)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 17/07/2013 11:20 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 17/07/2013 09:56 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> So, you are enjoying your new job, then?
>
> Yeah, at the moment it's OK. Sometimes I wish for a little more
> recognition - I just build an entire remote control framework, build a
> test framework on top of that, and then built a SpecFlow library on top
> of that, in addition to cleaning and implementing over 150 tests. I
> doubt anybody else in our office could have made this nice a job of
> it... but maybe I'm just deluding myself.
>

The real recognition comes when you get your review. In cash with any 
luck. :-D

>> Admit it. We were right, you were wasted in your old one.
>
> Oh, I thought I admitted that a long time ago. The contention was
> whether I *could* get another job, not whether I *should*...
>

Yes, your are right and I'm glad that you were wrong. ;-)

>> Have you heard how your old workmates are getting on and has your father
>> found a job yet?
>
> My dad has a crap dead-end job that pays peanuts and involves an even
> worse commute than the last job. Then again, it beats being unemployed,
> so...

As you say, it beats being unemployed. And when it comes to finding a 
new job it is better to be in one. Unless you are in my line of 
contracting, where availability to start immediately is important.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message