4 ms·
> Or maybe test coverage has/will become too noisy a parameter to use at all. It already is, ive banned unit tests via ci checks from our codebases, they were
by acedTrex 16d ago
> Or maybe test coverage has/will become too noisy a parameter to use at all.
It already is, ive banned unit tests via ci checks from our codebases, they were not particularly useful before LLMs and now they are a net negative.
We require int and some e2es and that does all that units do and more.
- agentultra 16d agoAre they slow and brittle? I like having both. Unit tests are a decent indicator for local development. Fast, quick to iterate on. Integration tests are slow as molasses and I can’t iterate with them when it takes 20 minutes to setup the suite and run everything. Too slow. But still useful as you say.
- acedTrex 15d agoThey don't flake, generally can run a few hundred in 3-4 mins. Iteration times are definitely key.
- eternityforest 15d agoI sometimes use unit tests to fill in gaps. I just caught a function with almost full coverage except for an if statement. Playwright e2e tests are harder to maintain than pytest code, so I wrote a test just for that one case, and while I was at it, a few other input strings that seemed like they could be problems. If the function had no test coverage at all, I probably would have tried to get it with an integration test, because that would mean the callers also weren't getting tested.
- acedTrex 15d agoThe occasional unit test is fine. But you do not need for example `test_helper_test.go` that is just ridiculous. Its gotten so bad I decided to throw the baby out with the bathwater so to speak and focus on the high value places instead of trying adjudicate every individual usage