News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Meta's new LLM-based test generator is a sneak peek to th... by TeMPOraL on Saturday February 24, 2024 @02:48AM (#39489922)
FWIW, writing implementation is much more pleasant/interesting experience, because you're writing the actual thing the application is supposed to do. In contrast, when writing tests, you're describing what the application is supposed to do, using an extremely bloated, constrained language, requiring you to write dozens or hundreds of lines of setup code, just to be able to then add few glorified if/else statements.

In my experience, at least in languages like C++ or Java, unit tests are made of tedium, so I'm absolutely not surprised that the first instinct is to use LLMs to write that for you.

Re:Meta's new LLM-based test generator is a sneak peek to th... by robryk on Saturday February 24, 2024 @04:03AM (#39490223)
This is my experience, unless I try to make the contract of the thing simple to test via property testing. Then, writing tests often becomes basically an exercise in writing down the contract in a succinct way.

Sadly, this is a rare approach, so if you cooperate with others it's hard to use it.

Re:Meta's new LLM-based test generator is a sneak peek to th... by Muromec on Saturday February 24, 2024 @05:12AM (#39490492)
I actually enjoy writing unit tests, but I do frontend stuff. For me it's the moment of calm and reflection when I step back and look carefully at what I built and say "nice, it works" to myself.
Re:Meta's new LLM-based test generator is a sneak peek to th... by ric2b on Saturday February 24, 2024 @05:26AM (#39490547)
Yeah, I suppose this is very language dependent. In Ruby I actually quite enjoy writing tests, whereas in Java it was boilerplate pain.