The article is about TDD. You can see on the page, that they are offering a TDD course using ruby/rails. TDD in Ruby community is overhyped. This infection spre

The article is about TDD. You can see on the page, that they are offering a TDD course using ruby/rails. TDD in Ruby community is overhyped. This infection spread to management too. If you apply to Ruby job today, you better have TDD or BDD in your CV. If you don't, you are garbage to them. I have experience with people infected with TDD in ruby land, they often look down on people who don't write tests for every single line of code they write. I am all for unit testing, but can we at least acknowledge that example based testing is just no panacea for bad software. No, easily testable code does not always imply good design. People that don't do TDD are actually doing TDD too, they test code in REPL/console/browser/whatever, they just don't save those "tests". You can not write perfect example based tests, that would cover all possible inputs and states of your system. You need generative testing solutions for this. Let the program write tests for you. [0] [1] See what Leslie Lamport [2] has to say about TDD --> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4Yp3j_jk8Q&t=3158s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4Yp3j_jk8Q&t=3158s He nearly flips out on the guy :)) Surely Leslie knows what he is talking about. I am ok with unit testing as a communication/documentation tool, so developers know how to use some piece of library. And to prevent regressions with new releases, but I would argue that you can never completely prevent those anyway, requirements change all the time. Maintenance of a large test suite can quickly get out of hand. [0] https://wiki.haskell.org/Introduction_to_QuickCheck1 https://wiki.haskell.org/Introduction_to_QuickCheck1 [1] https://clojure.org/about/spec https://clojure.org/about/spec [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Lamport https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Lamport