More importantly, that were done with TDD as opposed to unit testing, testing with a repl, etc.? A lot of claims about TDD's benefits seem to take credit for te

More importantly, that were done with TDD as opposed to unit testing, testing with a repl, etc.? A lot of claims about TDD's benefits seem to take credit for testing in general. (Automated testing is a clear win, IMHO.) Insisting on writing tests upfront does mean that you test consistently, but then it's hardly the primary cause. I'm sure it's a highly useful tool in some cases, but the people pushing it uncritically make it harder to tell when it's actually a good fit. In my experience, it's very useful for safely making changes in a legacy code, but I suspect it can encourage over-engineering surface details or getting caught in local maxima when used for initial design. (I usually just design with a REPL or notepad/whiteboard.)