Too bad because this presentation is nothing else than a commercial speech about a product that notifies errors in code. I was expecting more good practices instead of a demonstration of the service.
I did not know Scrutinizer and the tool seems interesting, I like the way it provides details on the code part that changed rather than on the whole application. This is a very interesting point.
I was a bit lost when it came to emergent design and some other terms that I did not well understand, however.
But the presentation was nice to follow, with a good rythm.
Thank you for the presentation of Scrutinizer. I would have preferred a talk more general and less focused on the Scrutinizer features, sounds a little bit more "commercial". However, it was interesting.
Scrutinizer is an awesome and powerful product, and it was good to see you in person presenting interesting aspects of it.
But I thinks the most important part was "Quality" in general. You try to bring some enlightenment about what's quality in general for other, and for you, but I was hopping to see more practical examples (codes snippets...) rather than a too-commercial speech about your tool.
Maybe a 5 min presentation at the end would be more adapted here.
Amazing tool, but you should put more emphasis on the differences between your tool and the ones other people may know (Sonar, SensioLabs Insight, etc).
Keep up the good work and thanks for this fantastic tool.
We were all kind of fooled by your talk because it looked perfectly genuine until we all realized that this was just a sneaky sponsored talk with you trying to sell your product. But anyway... you started by stating all of the obvious facts about testing (what is quality, what are the business benefits, what it changes for scalability, velocity, agility, blablablah). You stated a few good practices about improving code quality, but then again, it felt a bit 'captain obvious'.
The presentation of your software was great but... you were not being very objective. NetBeans IDE and tools like Sonar can already do what Scrutinizer does. You didn't address why it was better than the rest. What you called the Flow Analyzer was cool though, I'd have prefered a talk about how you implemented that.
Also, when someone asks «why not use open-source alternatives», maybe you should not reply with «they all suck».
Comments
Comments are closed.
Too bad because this presentation is nothing else than a commercial speech about a product that notifies errors in code. I was expecting more good practices instead of a demonstration of the service.
Interesting product.
Thanks for the presentation,
I did not know Scrutinizer and the tool seems interesting, I like the way it provides details on the code part that changed rather than on the whole application. This is a very interesting point.
I was a bit lost when it came to emergent design and some other terms that I did not well understand, however.
But the presentation was nice to follow, with a good rythm.
Interesting tool... But how does it feet for other programing languages ?
To much lines on sample codes to be seen from the middle of the room.
Thank you for the presentation of Scrutinizer. I would have preferred a talk more general and less focused on the Scrutinizer features, sounds a little bit more "commercial". However, it was interesting.
Scrutinizer is an awesome and powerful product, and it was good to see you in person presenting interesting aspects of it.
But I thinks the most important part was "Quality" in general. You try to bring some enlightenment about what's quality in general for other, and for you, but I was hopping to see more practical examples (codes snippets...) rather than a too-commercial speech about your tool.
Maybe a 5 min presentation at the end would be more adapted here.
But great talk anyway! Thanks.
Good conference spoken slowly and understandable.
Thanks a lot for this moment.
Scrutinizer is a unique service out there, what I think the best an most useful type of analsyis.
The fact you implemented a compiler that outputs such user-friendly messages can only deserve our respect :)
Concerning the talk, it could have been more fluent, I felt a small linearity during the speech that makes me say it could be improved.
Amazing tool, but you should put more emphasis on the differences between your tool and the ones other people may know (Sonar, SensioLabs Insight, etc).
Keep up the good work and thanks for this fantastic tool.
We were all kind of fooled by your talk because it looked perfectly genuine until we all realized that this was just a sneaky sponsored talk with you trying to sell your product. But anyway... you started by stating all of the obvious facts about testing (what is quality, what are the business benefits, what it changes for scalability, velocity, agility, blablablah). You stated a few good practices about improving code quality, but then again, it felt a bit 'captain obvious'.
The presentation of your software was great but... you were not being very objective. NetBeans IDE and tools like Sonar can already do what Scrutinizer does. You didn't address why it was better than the rest. What you called the Flow Analyzer was cool though, I'd have prefered a talk about how you implemented that.
Also, when someone asks «why not use open-source alternatives», maybe you should not reply with «they all suck».
perfect
Sûrement une bonne présentation de l'outils pour ceux qui ne le connaissait pas.
I'll definitely give a try to the security analysis options of the tool!
My only concern was about the readability of few code snippets (the font size was too small) but I can easily read them again from speakerdeck now.