While testing is essential for ensuring software quality, it’s not a silver bullet. I’m curious to understand the common limitations of testing, such as incomplete coverage, false positives/negatives, or missed edge cases.
What are the realistic boundaries of what testing can achieve, and how do teams typically address these limitations?
You know, after working in this field for a while, I’ve really come to appreciate how testing isn’t a cure-all for bugs. One key limitation I’ve experienced is incomplete test coverage.
Even when we hit 90%+ coverage, there are still those real-world edge cases or complex integration issues that somehow slip through. Automated tests, while super efficient, don’t always capture how users genuinely interact with the product.
We try to balance this out by integrating exploratory testing to catch those unexpected scenarios that the automated scripts might miss. It’s all about bridging that gap between theory and real-world use.
Absolutely, @ishrth_fathima
I’ve had my share of moments where testing didn’t guarantee a bug-free product. Testing can show the presence of bugs under specific conditions but can’t assure us that the software is flawless. One thing I’ve learned is that even when unit tests pass, the app can still fail, often due to incorrect assumptions or APIs that change unexpectedly.
I think of tests as safety nets rather than guarantees. To complement this, we also heavily rely on frequent code reviews and real-world monitoring to spot things that tests might miss. It’s a balancing act, isn’t it?
I couldn’t agree more, @Priyadapanicker
One limitation that adds a bit of complexity is dealing with false positives and negatives, especially with flaky test suites. Sometimes you end up chasing ghosts or, worse, ignoring actual failures.
To manage this, we maintain a “trust score” for our tests, if a test is flaky, it either gets fixed quickly or removed altogether. And yes, performance and security testing are often outside the regular test flow, so they can easily get neglected unless explicitly planned for. These areas need a more focused approach to ensure comprehensive testing across all levels.