QA可以高效无单元测试（TDD）？ [英] Can QA be efficient without Unit-testing (TDD)?

问题描述

一个公司的小开发团队在少数几个国家。
在几年成功地发布了一个软件产品（客户端微软的Visual Studio 2008的C ++，C中的Java＃和服务器）的基础上数学与交叉枝工程基本SCI（和高科技）研究。照片 软件开发不是基于TDD（测试驱动开发），不存在单元测试，以及QA部门等

A company has small dev teams over a few countries.
During a few years it releases successfully a software product (client in MS Visual Studio 2008 C++, C# and server in Java) based on mathematic and cross-branch engineering fundamental sci (and high-tech) researches.
The software development is not based on TDD (test-driven development), there is no unit-tests, as well as QA department, etc.

这家公司开始引进2-3人QA小组（部门，那么，质量保证措施/政策）。

This company initiates the introduction of QA group (department and, well, QA practices/policies) of 2-3 persons.

第一优先任务是建立图形用户界面和API的（自动）测试实践。

The first priority tasks are to establish (automated) testing practices of GUI and API.

时引入单元（或模拟）测试或TDD（测试驱动开发）必要的，强制性的质量保证成功？

Is introduction of unit (or mock) testing or TDD(test-driven development) essential and obligatory for success of QA?

更新：
数据库存储是MS SQL Server的。

Update:
Database storage is MS SQL Server.

UPDATE2：
感谢所有，但我张贴 HTTP：//testing.stackexchange .COM /问题/ 791 /什么 - 是 - 在-QA-除了测试

Update2:
Thanks to all but I posted http://testing.stackexchange.com/questions/791/what-are-in-qa-besides-testing

据我所知，后 - 事实上单元测试（或者，更确切地说，模拟）也许应该被纳入了经常性的错误，但他们应该引进第一个问题？
什么是可能的第一优先问题和他们的订单？ 如果后一个事实单元测试引入开发商或测试员？

I understand that after-the-fact unit-tests (or, rather, mock) probably should be incorporated for recurring bugs but should they be the first issue to introduce?
What are the possible first priority issues and their orders? Should after-the fact unit-tests introduced by developers or by "testers"?

可以QA是可能有效的无单元 - （mock-）的测试呢？

Can QA be possibly efficient without Unit- (mock-) testing at all?

UPDATE3：
感谢您的评论说，TDD是不是单元测试，我开始阅读：

Update3:
Thanks for comment that TDD is not Unit-testing, I started to read:

• TDD与单元测试（SO）
• 我应该使用TDD？
• 测试驱动开发与普通旧部
• <一个href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/64333/disadvantages-of-test-driven-development">Disadvantages测试驱动开发的？
• TDD测试不是单元测试

• TDD vs. Unit testing (SO)
• Should I Use TDD?
• Test Driven Development vs "Plain Old Unit
• Disadvantages of Test Driven Development?
• TDD Tests are not Unit Tests

问看过后：

• 亲的和反对的单元测试的事实之后。
• 单元测试演练与Visual Studio团队测试
• 亲的和反对的单元测试的事实之后。
• 当是时候有一个QA部门？
由QA工程师
• 单元测试
• 作用？
• <一个href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/142454/what-is-the-single-best-open-source-automation-tool-for-functional-web-testing">What是最好的一个开源自动化工具功能的网络测试
• <一个href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/507683/open-source-tool-for-stress-testing-load-testing-and-performance-testing">open对于压力测试，负载测试和性能测试
源代码工具
• 工具自动化GUI测试（在Windows上）？
• GUI测试
• 自动构建在.NET
• 测量类依赖性

• Pro's and Con's of unit testing after the fact.
• A Unit Testing Walkthrough with Visual Studio Team Test
• Pro's and Con's of unit testing after the fact.
• When is it time to have a QA department?
• Unit tests by a QA Engineer
• Role of Testers in Agile?
• What is the single best open source automation tool for functional web testing
• open source Tool for stress testing, load testing and performance testing
• Tools for automated GUI testing (on Windows)?
• GUI Testing
• Automate Builds in .net
• Measuring Class Dependencies

推荐答案

如上评论指出， TDD是不一样的单元测试。

我的忠告：

已经在类似的情况之前，（我是创始QA-ER在公司，直至这一点没有正式QA的方法），我想强调的是，你需要确保QA过程是无创到编程的过程。

Having been in a similar situation before (I was the founding QA-er at a company that up till that point had no formal QA methods), I would stress that you need to make sure that the QA process is non-invasive to the programming processes.

如果开发商已经习惯了TDD方法，那么它可能是容易实现TDD，但基于关闭它听起来像实施TDD可能会减慢发展（至少直到他们习惯了）的信息。

If the developers are already used to TDD methodologies then it might be easy to implement TDD, but based off the information it sounds like implementing TDD would probably slow down the development (at least till they got used to it).

如果你是想给宝宝一步的事情，那么我建议单元测试。这就是我实现了当我打电话给同一个任务，然后随着时间的推移我介绍了其他的事情。

If you are wanting to baby step things then I would suggest Unit testing. That's what I implemented when I was called to the same task, and then over time I introduced other things.

回答：

QA可有效不依赖于执行质量保证义务人的素质结构的单元测试。然而QA更有效当有结构化的单元测试，每个人都可以遵循。

QA can be effective without structured unit testing depending on the quality of persons performing the Qa duties. However QA is more efficient when there are structured unit tests that everyone can follow.

这篇关于QA可以高效无单元测试（TDD）？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！