Mostly, I agree, but his dismissal of whatever he doesn't like as "religion" is uncharitable at best. 1. Understanding different kinds of test doubles is not a

Mostly, I agree, but his dismissal of whatever he doesn't like as "religion" is uncharitable at best. 1. Understanding different kinds of test doubles is not a religion. It's actually more like science. There's a taxonomy of different critters that behave differently. In general, names for anything test-related are not standardized. Maybe Bray is confused with Babel? 2. Kent Beck (highest, most exalted pope of TDD) does not even use TDD religiously. Nor does he recommend that. He just recommends using it unless you have a reason not to. It's a default that forces thinking. I'm too lazy to dig up links, but that was underscored in his many-hour "debate" with a petulant DHH. 3. If Bray is suggesting adding a test-only method to production code, then no, please don't. It bloats code and it adds attack surface. And he can treat that as religion if he likes.