How to use differentWeight_result method of com.foo.rpc.examples.spring.hypermutation.HypermutationService class

Sometimes, in our test code, we need to handle actions that apparently could not be done automatically. For example, some mouse actions such as context click, double click, drag and drop, mouse movements, and some special key down and key up actions. These specific actions could be crucial depending on the project context.

Most test automation tools just do test execution automation. Without test design involved in the whole test automation process, the test cases remain ad hoc and detect only simple bugs. This solution is just automation without real testing. In addition, test execution automation is very inefficient.

I routinely come across test strategy documents when working with customers. They are lengthy—100 pages or more—and packed with monotonous text that is routinely reused from one project to another. Yawn once more— the test halt and resume circumstances, the defect management procedure, entrance and exit criteria, unnecessary generic risks, and in fact, one often-used model replicates the requirements of textbook testing, from stress to systems integration.

Entering the world of testers, one question started to formulate in my mind: “what is the reason that bugs happen?”.

In some sense, testing can be more difficult than coding, as validating the efficiency of the test cases (i.e., the ‘goodness’ of your tests) can be much harder than validating code correctness. In practice, the tests are just executed without any validation beyond the pass/fail verdict. On the contrary, the code is (hopefully) always validated by testing. By designing and executing the test cases the result is that some tests have passed, and some others have failed. Testers do not know much about how many bugs remain in the code, nor about their bug-revealing efficiency.