3 ms·
> Doesn't matter how good the tests are, by the time you've "reconstructed the code" from tests you're out of business. Running code with no tests makes money.
by ravenstine 5y ago
> Doesn't matter how good the tests are, by the time you've "reconstructed the code" from tests you're out of business. Running code with no tests makes money. Tests with no running code don't.
^^ comment from someone named hobbs
Exactly. Users can tolerate an app that's kinda broken in some ways, but tests don't make money. In fact tests can often cost money anyway if they're not testing what's really important. No matter what, there are going to be parts of your code that simply cannot be described by the tests that were written.
- cogman10 5y agoI look at it from a pure time perspective. I generally spend something like a 10:1 ratio of writing code vs tests. That is, it takes me 1/10th the time to write testing stuff vs the actual code. With that perspective, it's beyond silly to prefer the tests. You are saying "Should I throw away 90% of the work or 10% of the work?" Said another way, you are asking "Should I save the chapter headings of my book or the content?". I can make new chapter headings, but writing the actual chapters is where I spent all my time.