10 ms·
i have found that dogfooding and acceptance tests (tracking regressions), combined with focused source commits are the most practical. while unit tests laser i
by leeoniya 11y ago
i have found that dogfooding and acceptance tests (tracking regressions), combined with focused source commits are the most practical.
while unit tests laser in on specific problems, they are often unnecessary and with frequent commits and sensible commit messages, the causes of problems are always trackable and nearly always obvious.
git bisect helps in situations where the commit count is high (in large teams).
- fweespee_ch 11y agoI mostly agree with you. I've found unit tests shine in refactors simply because you are often refactoring for performance and/or bug extraction so the overall functionality of a given unit of code is largely identical to the previous version. However, outside of refactoring, I've never found them to be cost effective time wise compared to other automated testing options.
- Aleman360 11y agoYea, unit tests for messy logic and algorithms. Integration tests for complicated scenarios. Extensive dogfooding for the UI.