4 ms·

The deliverable here isn't the code, it's the output. If "check expected outputs" is a subjective step anyway, why not just check that the output of the code wh

• stonemetal12 5y ago
  > If "check expected outputs" is a subjective step anyway It isn't. It is the evidence that calculations in the code were done correctly. It is like the problems in high school math class. The teacher controls the inputs so that the outputs are known. The teacher then runs the test problem past the student (aka the code). If the known correct answer isn't generated then we know the student didn't do it right.
  • StavrosK 5y ago
    How do you tell that the calculations were done correctly? Presumably you have some way of doing that. Then, why don't you apply that way to the output? You don't need tests if you only need to do it once.
    • pigeonhole123 5y ago
      Checking that the code outputs what you think it does is a pretty low bar to clear. The fact that you can think of higher bars doesn't invalidate the value of checking this.
    • stonemetal12 5y ago
      >How do you tell that the calculations were done correctly? Presumably you have some way of doing that. Isn't that what we are discussing, how to tell if a piece of code works? You could do a formal proof that the code works (which is long and tedious) or you can test it (less long and tedious but less rigorous). >You don't need tests if you only need to do it once. It doesn't matter how many times you plan on running it. What counts is how much we value the output. I wouldn't bet $20 that untested code works correctly.