Best 46 quotes in «software development quotes» category

Anything written by people has bugs. Not testing something is equivalent to asserting that it's bug-free. Programmers can't think of everything especially of all the possible interactions between features and between different pieces of software. We try to break software because that's the only practical way we know of to be confident about the product's fitness for use.

Automated testing is a safety net that protects the program from its programmers

A good estimate is an estimate that provides a clear enough view of the project reality to allow the project leadership to make good decisions about how to control the project to hit its targets.

Any software project must have a technical leader, who is responsible for all technical decisions made by the team and have enough authority to make them. Responsibility and authority are two mandatory components that must be present in order to make it possible to call such a person an architect.

Coding like poetry should be short and concise.

El desarrollo de software comparte con el deporte profesional la característica de lograr que los treintañeros se sientan decrépitos

Commitment to deliver on time and on budget was not made based on the details; details didn't exist. Their commitment was based on the ability to shape the details.

Cross-Site Request Forgery exempt is a license to invoke a DJango REST API view.

If it is not written down, it does not exist.

...I’m not saying simple code takes less time to write. You’d think it would since you end up with less total code, but a good solution isn’t an accretion of code, it’s a distillation of it.

If a shell is in front of you side by side with an editor, you must be a developer.

It is a jackpot when you get to know javascript can be debugged.

Il campo @author di un Javadoc ci dice chi siamo. Siamo gli autori. E una caratteristica degli autori è che hanno dei lettori. In effetti, è responsabilità degli autori riuscire a comunicare bene coi loro lettori. La prossima volta che scriverete una riga di codice, ricordatevi che voi ne siete gli autori, e che scrivete a dei lettori che vi giudicheranno per quello che avrete scritto.

In the end, it all comes down to 0 and 1

It is best to be the CEO; it is satisfactory to be an early employee, maybe the fifth or sixth or perhaps the tenth. Alternately, one may become an engineer devising precious algorithms in the cloisters of Google and its like. Otherwise, one becomes a mere employee. A coder of websites at Facebook is no one in particular. A manager at Microsoft is no one. A person (think woman) working in customer relations is a particular type of no one, banished to the bottom, as always, for having spoken directly to a non-technical human being. All these and others are ways for strivers to fall by the wayside — as the startup culture sees it — while their betters race ahead of them. Those left behind may see themselves as ordinary, even failures.

In this chapter we've seen that, unlike when building a house, when it comes to software it's almost impossible to know what you want. And even if you did know, it would be impossible to know how long each part would take to do. And even if you did know the theoretical length of each task, it would be impossible to work out the amount of time it would take an actual team of a specified size to do it. Which goes some way to explaning the sordid catalogue of failure that is the history of software projects over the last fifty years.

Managers of programming projects aren’t always aware that certain programming issues are matters of religion. If you’re a manager and you try to require compliance with certain programming practices, you’re inviting your programmers’ ire. Here’s a list of religious issues: ■ Programming language ■ Indentation style ■ Placing of braces ■ Choice of IDE ■ Commenting style ■ Efficiency vs. readability tradeoffs ■ Choice of methodology—for example, Scrum vs. Extreme Programming vs. evolutionary delivery ■ Programming utilities ■ Naming conventions ■ Use of gotos ■ Use of global variables ■ Measurements, especially productivity measures such as lines of code per day

In many ways, being a good tester is harder than being a good developer because testing requires not only a very good understanding of of the development process and its products, but it also demands an ability to anticipate likely faults and errors

Programming is about managing complexity: the complexity of the problem, laid upon the complexity of the machine. Because of this complexity, most of our programming projects fail.

Programming is a social activity.

Reusing software modules does not guarantee safety in the new system to which they are transferred...

Software architecture is the set of design decisions which, if made incorrectly, may cause your project to be cancelled.

Software development is the process of creating a computer software. It includes preparing a design, coding the program, and fixing the bugs. The final goal of software development is to translate user needs to software product, while continuously improving the team and the process.

Software always remain softly for End users! But sometimes hardly to developers!

Software quality begins with the quality of the requirements.

Software Development is an ideal gas: it occupies all the volume it can.

Software testing is a sport like hunting, it's bughunting.

Software is easy to make, except when you want it to do something new. And then, of course, there is a corollary: The only software that's worth making is software that does something new.

Tests are sometimes mistaken with quality assurance. These two notions are not identical: 1) quality assurance ensures that the organization's processes are implemented and applied correctly; 2) testing identifies defects and failures, and provides information on the software and the risks associated with their release to the market

Quality is a product of a conflict between programmers and testers.

The ideal architect should be a man of letters, a skillful draftsman, a mathematician, familiar with historical studies, a diligent student of philosophy, acquainted with music, not ignorant of medicine, learned in the responses of jurisconsults, familiar with astronomy and astronomical calculations.

The job of a tester is to prove that the software is bug free, while it has to be the other way around: The job of a tester is to prove that the software is broken. The better testers are doing their jobs, the more bugs they manage to find and report.

The higher the price of information in a software team, the less effective the team is.

Quality is the complex concept. Because it means different things to different people, it is highly context-dependent. Just as there is no one automobile to satisfy everyone's needs, so too there is no universal definition of quality. Thus, there can be no single simple measure of social equality acceptable to everyone. To assess or improve software quality in your organization, you must define the aspects of quality in which you are interested, then decide how you are going to measure them. by defining quality in a measurable way, you make it easier for other people to understand your viewpoint and relate your notions to their own. Ultimately, your notion of quality must be related to your business goals. Only you can determine if good software is good business.

Quality must be enforced, otherwise it won't happen. We programmers must be required to write tests, otherwise we won't do it.

The Scrum idea of a separated Scrum Master is good for Scrum, but not appropriate for most projects. Good development requires not just talkers but doers.

Today I am more convinced than ever. Conceptual integrity is central to product quality. Having a system architect is the most important single step toward conceptual integrity. These principles are by no means limited to software systems, but to the design of any complex construct, whether a computer, an airplane, a Strategic Defense Initiative, a Global Positioning System. After teaching a software engineering laboratory more than 20 times, I came to insist that student teams as small as four people choose a manager and a separate architect. Defining distinct roles in such small teams may be a little extreme, but I have observed it to work well and to contribute to design success even for small teams.

The quickest methods aren't always the fastest methods

We must not blame programmers for their bugs. They belong to them only until the code is merged to the repository. After that, all bugs are ours!

We, newbies and young programmers, don't like chaos because it makes us dependent on experts. We have to beg for information and feel bad

When you yet to do 100% of what somebody wants, you need a perfect match, and it's pretty rare that you have a perfect match between what you thought people needed and what they actually need. If you try instead to do 80 percent of what they need, there's a pretty good chance you'll hit a sweet spot.

Worse yet is the rejection of upfront requirements. The basic observation is correct: requirements will change, and are hard anyway to capture at the beginning. In no way, however, does it imply the dramatic conclusion that upfront requirements are useless! What it does imply is that requirements should be subject to change, like all other artifacts on the software process. [...] The agile advice here is irresponsible and serious software projects should ignore it.The sound practice is to start collecting requirements at the beginning, produce a provisional version prior to engaging in design, and treat the requirements as a living product that undergoes constant adaptation throughout the project.

Years later, when I got to college, I learned about an important theory of psychology called Learned Helplessness, developed by Dr. Martin E. P. Seligman. This theory, backed up by years of research, is that a great deal of depression grows out of a feeling of helplessness: the feeling that you cannot control your environment.

There were in fact bugs," he recalls, "But the essential difference was in the obviousness of bugs, the repeatability of bugs, and potential for fixing bugs oneself. In this environment, bugs were only temporary delays on a steady road towards excellence and stability.

To focus on the visible at the expense of the essential is irresponsible.

We are a talented team of software developers that help you stay at the pulse of emerging technologies and meet all your custom software solutions. From software conception to installation, we are your local digital dream team.