Here's a step 0 for your debugging strategy: spend a few minutes thinking about what could account for the bug. Prior to its occurrence, you are thinking about what could go wrong, but now you are thinking about what did go wrong, which is a much less open-ended question.
marginalia_nu · 126d ago
I've had large success by treating the bug as a binary search problem as soon as I identify an initial state that's correct and a terminal state that's incorrect. It seems like a lot of work, but that's underestimating just how fast binary searches are.
Depends of course on the nature of the bug whether it's a good strategy.
alilleybrinker · 126d ago
There's also the Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE), a long-running taxonomy of software weaknesses (meaning types of bugs).
A subcategory of the design flaw I find quite a lot is the case where the code works exactly as intended, it's just not having the desired effect because of some erroneous premise.
readthenotes1 · 126d ago
I was such a bad developer that I realized I had to automate the re-running of parts of the system to find the bugs.
Of course, the code I wrote to exercise the code I wrote had bugs, but usually I wouldn't make offsetting errors.
It didn't fix all the problems I made, but it helped. And it helped to have the humility when trying to fix code to realize I wouldn't get it the first time, so should automate replication
bheadmaster · 126d ago
> I had to automate the re-running of parts of the system to find the bugs
I don't always test but adding a lil test after finding and fixing a bug so you don't end up there again a second time is a great practice
bheadmaster · 126d ago
Congratz, you've invented regression tests.
quantadev · 126d ago
Congrats, you've found someone who failed to invoke a buzzword that you know.
EDIT: But Acktshally `the code I wrote to exercise the code I wrote` is a description of "Unit Testing", not integration testing.
bheadmaster · 126d ago
Unit/integration tests are anything but a buzzword. And my intentions were not to belittle, but to praise.
Some actions simply make so much sense to do, that any sensible person (unaware of the concept) will start doing them given enough practice, and in process they "reinvent" a common method.
quantadev · 126d ago
As far as you knew that guy was aware what Unit Testing was since well before you were born. lol. I'm sure he appreciates all your nice compliments.
readthenotes1 · 124d ago
I was aware of unit testing before it had a name ... Desperation is the mother of intervention
quantadev · 124d ago
Yep, I "independently reinvent" the wheel every day I guess, because I, ya know...use wheels.
bheadmaster · 125d ago
Good thing he has knights in shining armor like you to defend him from my nasty insults.
quantadev · 125d ago
Good thing you can admit what you were doing.
bheadmaster · 125d ago
Good thing you can understand sarcasm.
quantadev · 125d ago
but your sarcasm was truthful.
bheadmaster · 125d ago
but it wasn't.
quantadev · 125d ago
Well in that case...Congratz, you've invented sarcasm.
bheadmaster · 123d ago
Congratz, you've invented obnoxiousness.
quantadev · 123d ago
Not "independently reinvented" ?
keybored · 126d ago
> And my intentions were not to belittle, but to praise.
With the stock eyeroll dismissal phrase.
Animats · 126d ago
The Third-Party Bug
Is the party responsible for the bug bigger than you? If yes, it's your problem. If no, it's their problem.
Depends of course on the nature of the bug whether it's a good strategy.
https://cwe.mitre.org/
Of course, the code I wrote to exercise the code I wrote had bugs, but usually I wouldn't make offsetting errors.
It didn't fix all the problems I made, but it helped. And it helped to have the humility when trying to fix code to realize I wouldn't get it the first time, so should automate replication
Congratz, you've independently invented integration tests.
EDIT: But Acktshally `the code I wrote to exercise the code I wrote` is a description of "Unit Testing", not integration testing.
Some actions simply make so much sense to do, that any sensible person (unaware of the concept) will start doing them given enough practice, and in process they "reinvent" a common method.
With the stock eyeroll dismissal phrase.
Is the party responsible for the bug bigger than you? If yes, it's your problem. If no, it's their problem.