Software development automation

Did you miss a session from the Future of Work Summit? Head over to our Future of Work Summit on-demand library to stream. Forty-six percent of software development executives see the need to up-level capacity with automation as a top concern. Manually logging time requires developers to frequently stop work to record activities — a time sink throughout the day.

Every organization surveyed tracks the time developers spend on development projects. Since managing team capacity is a top priority, software development leaders are looking to automation to eliminate mundane tasks that waste developer time. The high frequency with which surveyed organizations track time indicated a need to have a clear view of how time and effort are being invested — and a need to make tracking time seamless in order to save, not spend, time every day.

Organizations are looking to automation to increase capacity and save time. An automated approach to time tracking has not reached the same level of adoption as other automated software development tools.

Even if a single suite is not the one for everything, it is easier to tweak it, than to begin from scratch again. Utilizing it saves time, energy, and other resources. Before imploring the use of automation, the testing stage in software development is time-consuming and ego-depleting.

It demands focus and next-level critical thinking to go through all the possibilities that the software might turn into. But try as they might, developers might miss out on some possibilities, might forget some nooks and crannies because of its expanse.

Using automation suites limits and decreases the possibility of forgetting to check a particular code or sequence. It can easily conduct exploratory tests and other types of automated testing, according to the need.

As long as the feeded code is complete and the instructions are clear and precise, the testing will come out as in-depth and fully comprehensive. It will also take a much shorter time than when manually done. Placing your footing in the market is a tad bit difficult when you join the game late. Taking one step closer to the end-users as compared to the competitors. You have more time to market your software to the targeted population.

Also often considered as the first stage of testing, unit testing basically tests individual units of the software. Either the developer or the unit tester can code the units and test them out. Smoke indicates something is burning, right? In a similar manner, smoke testing sees to it if there are lapses or mishaps in the essential features of the software. The test follows the smoke trails to see the real damage that causes it. Essentially, it tests if the software is already stable enough to build on more.

Just as the name indicates, functional testing tests the overall functionality of the software. It tests the essential features, such as the interface, security, database, and APIs. Modules in the software or application are formed and then tested logically. Integration testing aims to verify the data communication between the modules.

This checks if the software works smoothly. Build a portion locally, deploy on a test server, and test before enacting changes that incur complex automation and further testing. To optimize for time, this may mean pausing the pipeline midway to make changes. Engineers often have a bias about their code. Therefore, testing is crucial to reveal otherwise overlooked bugs. Here, automation can be applied for unit testing, penetration testing, load testing, and security compliance testing. Interestingly, one area that is very hard to test automatically is user interfaces.

As the frontend is explicitly designed for human consumption, you really need end-users to walk through it to uncover UX hurdles. In this scenario, replicating a full-end-to-end experience could involve calls to a mock database to populate the corresponding fields. A degree of automation in the software development arena is necessary, but unfortunately, automation tools often miss key components.

Open-source automation software can help avoid vendor lock-in. Yet, open-source communities can enact disruptive changes — new versions could erase features or introduce new compatibility issues, requiring further support. Even stable tools may not function as advertised, forcing a team to develop a new set of development tools around the package. For example, API definition-based code library automation, de Lavenne describes, caused more effort than it was worth for his team.

Automation can bring quick early gains, but if your team finds itself repeatedly working around it to accomplish a goal, it may not be worth it. To mitigate some of the pitfalls above, it may behoove teams to build out internal automation functions or fork open-source tools for the most control.

Bill has been researching and covering SaaS and cloud IT trends since , sharing insights through high-impact articles, interviews, and reports. He is also a contributor to DevOps. He's originally from Seattle, where he attended the University of Washington. He now lives and works in Portland, Maine. Bill loves connecting with new folks and forecasting the future of our digital world. If you have a PR, or would like to discuss how to work together, feel free to reach out at his personal website: www.

Contact Bill Doerrfeld Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel. Connect with.