4 ms·

Some of us believe that tests increase work by 25% while only reducing defects by 60%. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Real

• RubenSandwich 9y ago
  I don't see how that isn't a good trade as defects only compound on larger projects. In fact without tests, which basically function as a spec, how can you be sure that your refactor still works as the previous version?
• iamflimflam1 9y ago
  Interesting - that 25% seems to come from managers estimating the impact, not from developers. Increase in time taken to code the feature because 15–20% 25–35% 15% 25–20% of TDD (%) [Management estimates] And this seems to imply that any increase in time was offset by reduced maintenance costs due to improved quality. Another interesting observation from the outcome measures in Table 3 is the increase in time to develop the features attributed to the usage of the TDD practice, as subjectively estimated by management. The increase in development time ranges from 15% to 35%. From an efficacy perspective this increase in development time is offset by the by the reduced maintenance costs due to the improvement in quality (Erdogmus and Williams 2003), an observation that was backed up the product teams at Microsoft and IBM.
• bonyboy 9y ago
  Microsoft uses WordPress? TIL