Re:TDD did not live up to expectations
by tokenizerrr on Friday June 30, 2017 @09:13AM
(#14670464)
But the code containing the bug is already there. The idea of TDD is that you write tests verifying behavior before there is any code.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
This definition of TDD either supposes that it is possible to write software with zero bugs using TDD, or that your project ceases to be TDD as soon as a bug is discovered, or any other change is required. I propose this definition is not very useful.
Re:TDD did not live up to expectations
by tokenizerrr on Friday June 30, 2017 @05:10PM
(#14673625)
I see that as just writing regular unit tests, business as usual. Not TDD, still very useful.
Re:TDD did not live up to expectations
by richardknop on Friday June 30, 2017 @10:30AM
(#14670966)
If you are writing something from scratch yes. But if you inherited a codebase written by somebody else who didn't to TDD so there are no tests, you can still use TDD for refactoring.
So any new changes/bugfixes you will make to this legacy codebase, first you will write a test and then make change. That's pretty standard. Many legacy codebases will have no tests and people who wrote the code will have left long time ago.