Re:An External Replication on the Effects of Test-driven Dev...
by mgkimsal on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @11:25AM
(#12744595)
I don't do 100% TDD, but do write code to be testable, and a lot of that mindset and experience came from trying TDD.
Forcing myself to think "how would this be tested?" helped, but doing some of the tests first got me in that frame of mind.
And by practicing that, you're writing code that - by definition - is reusable - you're using it in the tests, and in your production code. The 'reuse' thing doesn't have to mean 'reuse on 8 other projects' (a common rebuttal I've heard). Reusing the functionality in another part of your project 3 months from now is reuse too.
Re:An External Replication on the Effects of Test-driven Dev...
by itsdrewmiller on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @12:49PM
(#12745390)
If true, wouldn't this be detectable in academic studies? It's easy to write untestable code for small problems, too.
Conversely, extensible code can have the tests written before or after without much change to the amount of technical debt. The code is written to adapt to change, so tacking on robust tests wouldn't require too much technical debt.
Note that there is a balance. If you know your goals and have no reasonable expectation for them to change, then making everything extensible is unnecessary overhead. You can also have a mix of abstract functions that are extensible alongside immutable functions that handle something specific. It's all about what works best for your project.