Why Writing Test Cases Saves Time and Boosts Software Quality

Project System Overview

The solution consists of three subsystems: a geological system for data modeling, collection, calculation and transmission; an execution system that schedules vehicles and aggregates production data based on geological outputs; and a MES system that displays daily reports, dashboards and business data. The logical flow between systems follows the pattern data‑acquisition → calculation → execution → presentation. The project started without detailed requirement documents and with only two testers.

Writing Test Cases

Even when time is tight, writing test cases prevents critical test points from being missed, guarantees that every aspect of the system is verified, and provides strong quality assurance for the product.

Save time : Test cases describe exact steps and expected results, enabling testers to execute efficiently.

Clear logic : A well‑structured case lets testers understand purpose and flow, and resume work after interruptions without deviating.

Documentation : Cases serve as archival records of steps and outcomes, useful for progress tracking and team communication.

Avoid forgetting : Explicit cases ensure all key functions and scenarios are covered.

Business clarification : Writing cases forces deep understanding of functionality, revealing inconsistencies or missing requirements.

Key Points When Writing Cases

Focus on the main logic and data pathways to guarantee coverage of core functionalities and interactions. For a mining workflow, critical data includes geological design (sampling, mining, line planning, deep‑hole design, charge design, blast status), scheduling (deep‑hole and charge scheduling), and production management (line design views, daily statistics, dashboard data). Follow the same approach for any system.

Test Verification

Each case must define expected results so that verification does not miss any important point. For example, after a successful deep‑hole submission, the latest design diagram should appear in both measurement management and mining plan modules.

Review Process

After cases are written, a team review helps uncover hidden issues, improve coverage, and ensure comprehensive testing. If no formal review exists, individuals should still request feedback to grow.

Test Execution

Developers perform self‑testing after coding to confirm functionality and stability. Common problems include lack of understanding of critical business flows and unstandardized self‑test procedures, such as manually inserting data on the server instead of following real‑world steps.

Integration Testing

The project adopts a combined development‑testing mode to accelerate feedback. Bugs are recorded with a template that captures clear steps, expected vs. actual results, and screenshots. Two main practices are emphasized: recording results and logging bugs.

Bug Tracking

Bug tracking is managed via an online document (no dedicated bug‑tracking system). Communication methods include group chats for overall monitoring, private follow‑ups for stubborn bugs, and PM‑driven escalation to reduce coordination costs.

Root Cause Analysis

Analyzing the root cause of bugs, rather than merely fixing symptoms, yields several benefits: true problem resolution, prevention of recurrence, higher product quality, time and resource savings, process optimization, better team collaboration, and skill improvement for members.

Takeaways & Summary

During later testing stages, avoid over‑focusing on minor details that can cause “missing the forest for the trees.” Keep the main data flow closed‑loop, ensuring that each business stream is tested according to the data‑collection → flow → display model. Continuous reflection on these practices helps raise testing expertise and contributes valuable knowledge to the testing community.