4 ms·
It’ll cheat a lot when writing unit tests. Particularly “agentic” tools like cursor. It’ll get a test to pass, even if it’s against a laughably incorrect implem
by chamomeal 1y ago
It’ll cheat a lot when writing unit tests. Particularly “agentic” tools like cursor. It’ll get a test to pass, even if it’s against a laughably incorrect implementation.
I’ve ended up with tests called stuff like “foobar successfully returns impossible value that suggests programmer error” lmao
- mikeocool 1y agoMy favorite thing Claude code has been doing recently is adding second totally separate implementation of whatever I asked it to write tests for, and writing the tests against that. Conveniently, when it then changes the original implementation, the tests don’t fail!
- queenkjuul 1y agoThis is just about the only type of test i see it write lol
- cmrdporcupine 1y agoYeah, or "bug was pre-existing and not my fault so shrug, here's a TODO and we'll just say it passed" (not those exact words, but close)
- csar 1y ago“70% of tests pass. This codebase is ready for production!”