- 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 <dduvall(a)wikimedia.org> 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 <bgerstle(a)wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
> > +1 for the follow-up of the "Is TDD Dead?"
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Sam Smith <samsmith(a)wikimedia.org>
> 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 <cfloyd(a)wikimedia.org>
> 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
> >>> Mobile-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Mobile-l mailing list
> >> Mobile-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >>
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
> > Mobile-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
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