testjutsu

Those of you who have seen ‘Dead Poets Society‘ may remember Robin Williams exhorting his students to stand on their desks in order to show them the importance of having multiple perspectives of the world. I always thought that this was a most excellent scene. If you haven’t seen it, consider checking it out (or check out the screenplay in the link and grep for ’stand on my desk’).

I had my own ’standing on my desk’ moment after I recently took up nito (fighting with two swords), after many years of wanting to. Kendo is traditionally done with one sword from a stance called chudan no kamae. There are four other defined kamae, but chudan is by far the most prevalent.

Chudan is a highly versatile kamae with both strong offensive and defensive aspects. The range of techniques one can execute from chudan is far greater than any of the other kamae. It is also easier to judge the distance between you and your opponent, and execute multiple attacks from chudan. The consensus that I am aware of, seems to promote a high degree of proficiency with chudan before considering moving on to other kamae. This is something I agree with. I’m not saying you can’t be effective if you learn another kamae before having a good understanding of chudan. There are numerous examples to the contrary.

However, I do think that if you want a good understanding of chudan no kamae as well as others (as opposed to being a specialist in one kamae), then having an understanding of chudan before moving on is paramount. If you’re going to use another kamae, you’ll still be coming up against chudan kendoka more often than anyone else. Understand thy enemy.

In the short space of time that I have been practicing nito, I have gleaned numerous insights into my itto kendo that I might otherwise not have seen. For that alone, practicing nito has provided a valuable alternate perspective of my itto kendo. I think one of the keys to having these insights to begin with is the understanding of itto kendo, more specifically chudan no kamae. If I didn’t already have a good understanding of itto kendo, then very likely doing nito would have been more of a hindrance to my learning than a help.

As it stands, I have a decent understanding of distance and timing and what constitutes an opportunity for attack. These things differ subtly (but importantly) between nito and itto chudan. Because I understand one, I can relate them when I encounter them in the other. Each kamae informs my kendo about the other and I believe, makes my kendo better for it overall.

For example, nito uses one long sword, and one short. Typically, the short sword is held in front as a foil whilst the long sword is held overhead. When two itto kendoka engage in chudan, they judge the distance from each other by where their swords cross. That distance is different for nito such that if a chudan kendoka crosses with the short sword, they are actually dangerously close, and the nito kendoka can simultaneously cast their sword aside, and strike with the long sword.

Moreover, the nito kendoka can extend or retract the position of the shortsword to further confound the opponent’s sense of distance. Thinking about it – there’s no reason you couldn’t also do the same with one sword, and there are techniques where this occurs, but I’d never really consciously thought about it before. It makes me wonder what other insights I’ve missed by not allowing myself a differing perspective in other walks of life.

I think there are certainly parallels to be drawn as a software tester. If you think you have an excellent understanding of something, find a way to change your perspective, to challenge the ancient wisdom (such as it is). If you think you understand how a particular programming language works, learn about the underlying architecture that it runs on – see how the performance or the operation of the code differs from one to the other and why. If your product has competitors – check out their product. What does it tell you about yours? You are only really limited by your imagination. If you have trouble coming up with something, try standing on your desk.

落花枝に
帰ると見れば
胡蝶哉

A haiku written by Moritake Arakida which can be translated as ‘Did I see blossom return to the branch? (No, it was) a butterfly.

When I first read this, it struck a chord with me for some reason. Perhaps it was that someone found mistaking a butterfly for a blossom or a leaf profound enough to write a poem about, or that four hundred years later it would be around for the likes of me to read and enjoy. Perhaps it’s because the nature of cherry blossoms is so very fleeting, I liked the idea of a single flower bucking the system. In any case, it’s one of my favourites.

From a testing point of view, it serves to remind me to challenge my preconceptions. Because I think something is so, doesn’t necessarily mean that it is. The map is not the territory. Have you ever edited code, and run it only to find zero change? Done variations on that for hours before realising it was the wrong file? I have, but only because I didn’t challenge my presumption that I was editing the right file.

If something isn’t working as you expect – especially if it’s one of those really excruciatingly difficult things to find, try taking a step back and examining if you can, what your most basic assumptions are – then challenge them. After all, when you really get down to it, if you rip the wings off a butterfly, it’s just another bug.

Most testers I know love brain-teasers and mind games. I’m no exception (I just happen to be really crap at them). When news surfaced that the new Nine Inch Nails album ‘Year Zero’ had an alternate reality game (ARG) attached to it, I was initially skeptical. Probably some bullshit marketing hype for the emo fanboys to spend their pocket money on.

I didn’t bother looking into it too much initially, but after attending their recent concerts in Melbourne, I thought I’d check it out. Turns out that it’s less (overtly) about the marketing, and more about well, the album itself I suppose – anti-government resistance from 15 years in the future are sending back forbidden images and data to us here in the past.

Checkout ninwiki.com for what has been found so far. If you’re a fan of sleuthing out obscure references in texts and interpreting that to find hidden messages in things, then you’ll probably enjoy this. If you already enjoy Trent Reznor’s music, you’ll probably like it more.

In any case, I think it’s a great exercise to keep a tester’s mind sharp. I might throw it to my test team and see how they do.

I was at a good friend’s wedding several nights ago, which was held at one of the more well-to-do hotels in Melbourne. The night itself was an immense success. The bride and groom looked fantastic, I caught up with old friends from far away and a great time was had by all. It struck me though how deep testing seems to run in my veins – I just can’t seem to switch off (even when there’s an open bar).

I arrived on foot and my first impression of the place was the apparent haphazardness of the valet parking – there were a lot of cars and all of them were parked on the footpath leading to the lobby. My better half and I picked our way to the front doors, taking care not to scratch the paintwork of some reasonably expensive machines.

Once inside, there was the matter of finding a cloakroom. There was nothing in the immediate vicinity, so I asked at the concierge. ‘Oh, it’s downstairs’ said they. The stair case was about fifty meters away on the other side of the hall.

So not only was the cloakroom not located close to the main entrance, but the process of asking after it left you about as far away from it as it was possible to be. I headed down to the cloakroom and was asked ‘are you here for the ball, or the wedding?’ and when I responded with the latter, was directed back upstairs to the bus service desk outside the main entrance.

Somewhat incredulous, I headed back upstairs. The first thing the chap at the bus desk said when I presented my coat was ‘oh, you’ll have to go down to the cloak room’.

Not the most wonderful first impression of what is supposed to be one of the city’s finest hospitality establishments. The place was certainly decked out ostentatiously. They hadn’t spared expense on materials, but whoever designed the place, didn’t have the end-user in mind.

Things on the usability front didn’t improve that much over the course of the night. In three of the four places I was in that night (lobby included), the doors to the toilets were built to look like the rest of the wall and were nigh-on invisible. I observed at least twenty people ask the staff where they were.

I can understand not wanting to have pink flashing neon lights that say ‘here be the dunny’, and I get the whole ‘wanting to be subtle’ thing. It’s nice, but surely there is a way to have the entrance to the water closet be unobtrusive and yet visible when needed. A door sign that reads ‘ladies’ or ‘gents’ is not going to spoil the ambience. That and not being asked to point them out is likely to be less grating to the staff.

The wedding reception was in a bar on the lobby level. It had a spiral staircase that opened onto a wide area with all sorts of nooks and crannies in which small groups of people could hide and chat. Which is great when you’ve ordered five drinks and have no idea where the people you just ordered them for have disappeared to.

When the time came to leave, we discovered that because the place was easy to get into, it didn’t necessarily follow that it was easy to leave. The staircase itself finished in one corner and was blocked off from one side such that it looked accessible from both sides until you actually went to use it. Not conducive to use by a room full of people with access to an open bar. At the top of the stairs, opaque glass walls confronted us, and led the eye around to the kitchens – and nothing else.

Closer inspection revealed that one of the glass walls was actually a door, but again, not really designed with the end user in mind. My overall impression of the place was that it was a very large, very expensive place that was designed to make you feel uncomfortable and dumb as often as possible. Probably not what you really want from a hotel.