4 ms·

I don't think it is really unresolved. Static languages with sufficiently rich and modifiable type systems avoid a fraction of cases where you may well want a

by ska 3y ago

I don't think it is really unresolved. Static languages with sufficiently rich and modifiable type systems avoid a fraction of cases where you may well want a unit test, but it's not the overwhelming majority. Merely static helps too but not all that much. So while there is a reduction, it's a stretch to call it "dramatic".

throwaway290 3y ago
> I don't think it is really unresolved Well, you are currently participating in a thread that discusses this very question so there's that... and such threads are regular on HN. I meant just that. People discuss it. What you want to say is that you have a strong opinion about it, that's OK and still possible with open questions
- ska 3y ago
  People discuss lots of things that are pretty well solved; i wouldn't equate "open question" with "lots of discussion". I guess in this context I mean that the question of static vs. dynamic in unit testing turns out to not be that hard, but the questions like "what is a unit test" and "should we unit test at all" are much muddier. Because people are confused or argumentative about the latter, they tend to pull the former into discussions that don't really have much to do with static vs. dynamic.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]