Great post indeed! I printed it out and taped it on my manager’s monitor. I appreciate the application of sapience to ‘checking’. I was curious to read Joe Rainsberger’s blog on Integration Testing is a Scam but your link is broken. This one works: http://blog.thecodewhisperer.com/2010/10/16/integrated-tests-are-a-scam.

Michael replies: He changed it! I fixed it! Couldn’t have done it without your help, though; thank you for that.

Sorry I missed your latest visit to Calgary.

Me too.

Cheers,
Brian

One thing that I would add to the post is that everything you write above can also apply to scripted manual test cases; you know, the kind that specify exact steps to take, inputs to enter, results to expect and suppress any and all (sapient) exploration while at it. The ones that are typically handed over to the unfortunate tester who is expected to be that sufficiently disengaged human you write about.

This has all the elements I've been looking for in this discussion. The point that the activity of checking is surrounded (or should be if done well) by so many more skills and activities from selection, result gathering and analysis to determination of significance.

This is a feedback loop implying that not all checks are equal and some go past their "best before" date – ie the active selection and analysis is important.

I'm missing a couple of sentences prompted by the following:-

"Note, too, that this means that a check can be performed by one of two agencies: 1) a machine. 2) A sufficiently disengaged human; that is, a human who has been scripted to behave like a machine, and who has for whatever reason accepted that assignment.
"

Suppose a check is performed by an observant and alert checker (tester) – I guess this is the point at which it ceases to be a check. Or an alert & observant checker could execute a check (even though he might spot anomalies he ignores them if they're not on the check-list) and anyone else spotting the anomaly and reacting to it is more of a tester than a checker…

I enjoyed the read, thanks!