> > - Don't trip on % coverage.
A good analogy I've heard is that code coverage is to project health as blood pressure is to human health. Bad blood pressure is usually a bad sign, but good blood pressure isn't in itself a bill of good health. - Tests are just as subjectively written as the rest of your code. > Don't test yourself into a false bubble, a tautological hellscape of > antipatterns (however you want to put it :). I would go further and stipulate that clean coding principles apply just as much (if not more) to tests as they do to "production" code. Namely: don't repeat yourself and make the intent as clear as possible. Matching frameworks help, but writing good tests takes practice. On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Dan Duvall <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks so much for sharing. That series was a long haul but I found it > really insightful, definitely time well spent. > > A few lessons I took away from it: > - TDD is just one of many ways to get continuous feedback on your > code. If it doesn't fit the use case, don't force it. > - If you're trying out TDD, don't get too hung up on the "driven" > aspect of it. It doesn't strictly mean red/green/refactor. > - Don't trip on % coverage. > - Tests are just as subjectively written as the rest of your code. > Don't test yourself into a false bubble, a tautological hellscape of > antipatterns (however you want to put it :). > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Brian Gerstle <[email protected]> > wrote: > > +1 for the follow-up of the "Is TDD Dead?" > > > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Sam Smith <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> There's a great set of recorded hangouts between Kent Beck, Martin > Fowler, > >> and DHH titled "Is TDD dead?": > http://martinfowler.com/articles/is-tdd-dead/ > >> > >> As with that talk, I'd highly encourage you to take the time to watch > >> them. > >> > >> –Sam > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Corey Floyd <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> This is from a while back, but I finally got around to watching it. I > >>> think it is a really good questioning of our assumptions around > testing (and > >>> of course it is a controversial talk - it is DHH) > >>> > >>> To me, the TL;DR was: > >>> > >>> - The main goal of writing code should be creating maintainable code > with > >>> clear intent. > >>> - While unit testing is good, it is not a panacea for planning good > >>> architecture or system testing. > >>> - Good unit testing coverage will not spontaneously birth good > >>> architecture and at times it can even work against code clarity. > >>> - System testing is a better representation of how our code works > >>> - Unit testing should support our goals, and not become a goal in and > of > >>> it self. > >>> > >>> I highly encourage everyone to carve out some time to watch. > >>> > >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LfmrkyP81M > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Corey Floyd > >>> Software Engineer > >>> Mobile Apps / iOS > >>> Wikimedia Foundation > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Mobile-l mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Mobile-l mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > EN Wikipedia user page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brian.gerstle > > IRC: bgerstle > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Mobile-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l > > > > > > -- > Dan Duvall > Automation Engineer > Wikimedia Foundation > -- EN Wikipedia user page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brian.gerstle IRC: bgerstle
_______________________________________________ Mobile-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
