MS SQL Server

The Quoting (F3) was a success, but to roll out to all 50 states, we needed an engine that could handle the complexity of the system, render quickly, and that was easier for our engineers to build and test with.

I took the most complex page of the Direct Auto Quoting app - the "Buy Page" - and drastically improved performance, reducing render time from 28 seconds to 2, by isolating the page and building it with a prototype of what would become REF2.

Seeing such a drastic improvement in performance gave the business the confidence they needed to convert Quoting (F3) to REF2 and use it to roll out to the remaining states. (sidenote: a code-oriented framework, FlashQuoting, which did away with REF2's markup and code bindings, superceded REF2 before all 50 states were rolled out. The later popularity of and similarities with React confirmed REF2 was onto something.)

Technical Details REF2 targeted both Flash and HTML during the pre-webkit era. Created technology-independent language and APIs for describing UI hierarchies, cascading styles, business logic and arbitrary data structures in a way that abstracted the developer away from the details of the client/server event communications, marshalling between multiple client technologies, persistence of state concerns, or the details of rendering engines / APIs in the various supported environments. Aided in development of dev tools such as code hinting and code generation to facilitate quick onboarding, compile time checks, type safety and debugging.

Having shown in Quoting (F3) and REF 2.0 (UI Framework) that tests and low complexity policies led to fewer bugs and higher velocity by doing some a/b studies, the business invested in tooling to automatically measure and enforce policies across the Direct Quoting line of business software development teams.

These teams used a variety of software stacks and technologies, including proprietary build and release systems.

I consulted with the build and release team, at the time, a separate team, to understand their plugin architecture which already was in use for all said teams.

Next, I worked with each team to understand their level of code coverage across different types of tests (unit, integration, end to end), and agree with them what targets they wanted to meet, and at what point in time.

Some teams required me to implement coverage measurement tools. Keep in mind that we were not able to use open source tech, and actionscript had no unit testing or code coverage tools.

I worked with a mentor of mine to write a lexer-parser-generator, which took the grammar for the actionscript language and allowed us to instrument our codebase with a pre-build step that inserted beacon calls with metadata into the various methods of the application. The coverage monitor and unit test UI was written in C#.

I exposed the coverage reporting service using web services running on SOAP via MS ASP.net WCF communications stack. Initially an MS SQL database housed the data, but as it grew, we moved it to a data cube where various dimensional summary and BI queries could be more efficiently run without interfering with the transactional nature of concurrent builds reporting their metrics in across the business.

Built upon existing code analysis and instrumentation tools to create a cross-platform solution for the build-time analysis of unit and system test code coverage, cyclomatic complexity, code coupling, defect density, change volume, maintainability, and other quality metrics. Data from many different proprietary formats is transformed into a single canonical format, where it is in turn normalized into a relational structure to facilitate on demand querying for system-level quality benchmarking, real-time code quality reporting, providing objective insight into QA risk assessments / test strategies, and enforcement of architectural standards and constraints.