3 ms·
I should add that pure craftsmanship strikes me as a limited point of view: what is the point of "high quality" if no one uses your software? https://blog.omet
by itamarst 10y ago
I should add that pure craftsmanship strikes me as a limited point of view: what is the point of "high quality" if no one uses your software?
https://blog.ometer.com/2016/05/04/professional-corner-cutting/ https://blog.ometer.com/2016/05/04/professional-corner-cutti... has a better take than just "quality all the time" that TDD advocates sometimes take on.
- brudgers 10y agoMy impression is that Uncle Bob works for clients that have software that people are already using at some meaningful volume (volume rather than scale). I could be wrong.
- itamarst 10y agoWell, for TDD specifically I tend to think of it as a testing methodology for libraries. Application logic tends to be hard to test that way since they're about human interaction. Of course, you want applications built out of libraries. But eventually if you do that you end up at the point of "this is pure UI code and unit tests will do me no good." So I don't think it's just "stable, mature product" vs. "new product". It's also about code structure and where the abstraction layers are, and which abstraction layers are stable and therefore amenable to automated tests. A UI can change in ways that a human will not even notice but will break brittle automated tests. There's workarounds, of course, and probably it's possible to build much better tooling than actually exists.