News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Kent Beck: “I get paid for code that works, not for tests” (2013). Parent comment

Re:Kent Beck: “I get paid for code that works, not for tests... by TallGuyShort on Thursday December 08, 2016 @10:49AM (#13131005)
>> - as documentation

Thank you for including this - it's underappreciated. So many times recently I've needed to write code against some poorly documented API (not always due to lack of effort, some things are hard to document well in prose / JavaDocs, or just due to constant change), but I took one look at the unit tests and it all made sense - and I knew it was up to date for the latest work.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Kent Beck: “I get paid for code that works, not for tests... by Freak_NL on Thursday December 08, 2016 @10:59AM (#13131122)
Tests are great for dyslexic colleagues as well. A good clear concise unit test is often easier to grasp than the best of API documentation (e.g., JavaDoc in Java).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Kent Beck: “I get paid for code that works, not for tests... by TallGuyShort on Thursday December 08, 2016 @12:03PM (#13131831)
Good point - I'd bet it applies to autism and such too.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Kent Beck: “I get paid for code that works, not for tests... by euyyn on Thursday December 08, 2016 @04:25PM (#13134442)
I think it applies to everybody. I think it was Terence Tao who had a blog post claiming (and showing) that teaching by example first is the most effective.
[ Parent | on HN ]