2 ms·
This hn article is literally a link to minitest code.
by tomlockwood 4y ago
This hn article is literally a link to minitest code.
- Dylan16807 4y agoBecause it's unprofessional. Or to argue about whether the tests truly do suck. Not because you can flip the standard around and say it sucks for those same reasons it accuses some tests of sucking. The stuff you said up here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34829343 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34829343 is just wrong.
- tomlockwood 4y agoYou're arguing that me saying minitest authors should put "i_suck" in their library name is unprofessional, on this post? It "sucks" because it has an inaccurate method name that implies an inferiority. This is my current and original criticism of the minitest devs. Your idea that I am unprofessional, is an opinion. "This method name indicates a lack of understanding that finding the right balance of speed, cost and quality is a compromise."
- Dylan16807 4y ago> You're arguing that me saying minitest authors should put "i_suck" in their library name is unprofessional, on this post? No I am not.
- tomlockwood 4y agoI feel like you need to express your point better!
- Dylan16807 4y agoThe minitest author(s) were unprofessional. That unprofessional humor is the main reason it was posted. But that's different from writing code that sucks. A single flag name like that doesn't even affect functionality or readability.
- tomlockwood 4y agoIt actually does, it's generally agreed that longer method names are worse unless the length is descriptive. This isn't a super contraversial idea.