News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on When you shouldn't bother unit testing. Parent comment

Re:When you shouldn't bother unit testing by prepend on Friday May 17, 2013 @11:45AM (#5725050)
TDD has some challenges, but it addresses the critical need of having solid unit tests for code that allow projects to be modified and used by diverse sets of programmers who aren't going to reach out and ask you if their change broke your code.

I've frequently heard criticism of TDD most loudly by those who don't write unit tests, do unit tests manually, or intend to write them "after they get everything working." This last excuse is most egregious because one rarely has time to go back and write tests for something that is working because there will always be something more pressing than addressing the minor technical debt of writing "unneeded tests."

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:When you shouldn't bother unit testing by papsosouid on Friday May 17, 2013 @12:16PM (#5725239)
>but it addresses the critical need of having solid unit tests

No, it is entirely orthogonal to having unit tests, that's exactly what I was saying. There is absolutely no evidence to support the claims that TDD is more effective than just being a normal developer who writes tests as needed.

>This last excuse is most egregious because one rarely has time to go back and write tests

Says who? I think it is pretty absurd to invent fake problems to try to justify something. If TDD were actually useful, proponents wouldn't need to compare TDD with "don't write tests at all because obviously the only way to end up with tests is using TDD".

[ Parent | on HN ]