Programmer Humor

32558 readers

492 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

cat_programmer@lemmy.ml

722

Got no time to code (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 5 months ago by alphacyberranger@sh.itjust.works to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml

96 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 33 points 5 months ago (1 children)

QA and Code reviews do different jobs. Manual and automated testing will not notice your code is shit, so long as all test cases pass.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's what QA engineering is for. They are integrated into the dev team and they pull double duty with QA and code review.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 5 months ago (2 children)

In my company QA is dedicated to manual and automated tests. I haven't met many QA engineers who could effectively review any of my code.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm thinking of it not as a title, but a role. Often times the 2 are not related

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sorry, I'm not native English. What would be the difference?

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

A title is just something a company calls a particular job. A role is what that job actually is. So a lot of jobs might be called "QA engineer", but not fitting the intended role

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 months ago

Gotcha. I mean, all software engineers should do some QA engineering, but we have QA engineers who are the experts and "QA coaches".

[–] Marketsupreme@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

As a qa engineer this makes me feel better about myself. Because I'm included on reviews but never know what I'm looking at.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I've worked in places where QA we people with no coding knowledge who just clicked around looking for bugs, as well as places where QA never did that, only automated tests. And then there are places that believe hiring QA is useless, because "everyone should do QA".

[–] Marketsupreme@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This is my first big career job and in my limited experience I think I support the idea of a second pair of eyes, with a hybrid on automated testing. It seems more comprehensive and thorough than having a single person work on a task (minus code reviews).

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 months ago

In the end it comes down to the size of the team/company.