It was maybe better to find your bugs and to report and to support them during the development of your software.
That is not how software development works. Coders take care of what they see, which is most of the bugs, but only testers can take care of scenario's that the coder can not see or predict.
Hence in my last job we had 40+ coders and 20 testers. Also had test automation in place (which takes care of a different category of bugs)
To sum up: it is not even likely that the coder can find all bugs. His focus is elsewhere. Testing requires other people. Hence bug reports exist.... And good coders appreciate those reports very much. Only bad coders find them annoying...
An example why this is the case:
Testers take also into account the expectations of functionality of the customer, as in owner of the software in general.
Coders work based on a given specification of functionality as in what needs to be coded.
The coder does not write the specification. The customer does. So testers are necessary to check if the specifications are right too. It is often the case that expectation and specification do not meet. That is not the fault of the coder....
Functional design - produced by the customer - technical design by the architect based on the functional design - finally given to the coder. These roles can intermix, but not often in large projects.
And all three of the roles can cause bugs....
Finally:
skalogryz is a
very professional coder, so the remark you made is completely out of place. Reason: what you wrote as "better" HAS been done and is continuing... You obviously are too lazy to help. You say (paraphrased) it does not work. You don't give enough information beyond that. Not very helpful.
Recent
