This might be the first time I disagree with him. But as someone who did automated testing for years- this I can't get behind. Tests are code and thoughtlessly accumulating tests can create huge burdens. Which ironically usually leads to people ignoring tests.https://twitter.com/fchollet/status/1273714126645161985 …
-
Yeah, seem he’s offering advice relevant for a very particular context: hundreds of developers, over many years, and (I’d guess) a dynamic language. Many valuable projects are not developed under those conditions, don’t need 100% coverage, can’t afford it, shouldn’t glorify it.
Oh yeah the dynamic language thing.... I think I'm in the minority and sound grumpy but I don't think a great selling point for the productivity of dynamic languages is that you can write code super fast....as long as you use a whole bunch of tests as a crutch for the language!
-
-
I think you’re only in the minority … within the dynamic language communities!
-
Agree there's an "a falsis principiis proficisci" effect with testing orthodoxy. A good type system allows a codebase to be more flexible and helps you iterate quickly. We shouldn't have to spend time re-creating a type system in test form which we then have to maintain.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.