3 ms·
Many things are not testable. Not sure I'd use that as a reason to judge someone down. In fact all the most productive teams I've worked on or with, don't have
by mtnGoat 7y ago
Many things are not testable. Not sure I'd use that as a reason to judge someone down. In fact all the most productive teams I've worked on or with, don't have anywhere near full test coverage. The best had none in fact.
- viklove 7y agoWhat were they building, a todo app?
- mtnGoat 7y agoOne of them is the web/system app that powers an Alexa top 10 site. Keep trying. ;) In fact I can think of at least 10 sites in the alexa top 100 that don't have any tests.
- aledalgrande 7y agoLots of QA people?
- icebraining 7y agoI think you're thinking too narrowly about what "testable" means. Everything can be made testable.
- tetek 7y agoIt isn't about test coverage, it's about feature completeness. For eg. One feature require backend & frontend work, after a week of work engineer says that this is done. So you ask him to demo, and it turns out he is doing a backend demo with some dev tools. From a product perspective nothing has changed. Top engineers understand, that no one cares that only one part is working, they know the end user and will not bother managers/product owners with partial solutions.
- mtnGoat 7y agoSo you mean, it should work? Not sure I'd agree with that being a distinction among great programmers as much as a minimum bar of entry to call yourself one.