3 ms·
> they are proof that the work that you just did is correct and you can move on Well... they should be. The number of Tests I've seen that are functionally use
by abritinthebay 10y ago
> they are proof that the work that you just did is correct and you can move on
Well... they should be. The number of Tests I've seen that are functionally useless is far too high.
Because what you test is much more important. I know I'm not imparting new wisdom here but if your test can't survive a refactor it's probably a) far too fragile b) poorly written and c) testing the wrong thing.
I actually would not be surprised if a large percentage of Unit Tests are useless, other than coverage stats, but I agree with you that this article is very full of hyperbole to the point of ruining any point it might have had.
- bluejekyll 10y agoYes, I totally agree with this. I've worked in large orgs, where there were QA engineers that needed work, would come and ask, what tests they could write. My response was always, "well, I think I handled all the positive use cases, so you can add negative test cases", which I've never really seen a huge point in (though that depends on the interface contract).