News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Most Unit Testing is Waste [pdf] by ilbe on Thursday March 06, 2014 @10:45AM (#7354348)
I think there's a bigger design problem then, e.g. those functions should really be classes. I'm just talking about doing a few 'extract method' refactorings.
Re:Why Most Unit Testing is Waste [pdf] by collyw on Thursday March 06, 2014 @11:20AM (#7354612)
I sometimes find that code which doesn't involve lot of nesting is a lot easier to read and comprehend as one long method / function / subroutine than chopping it up into multiple small methods and having to jump around trying to work out what is happening. There is often nothing to be gained by splitting it up in my opinion.

Is that not why some languages are known as scripting languages, because you can read them like a script?

Re:Why Most Unit Testing is Waste [pdf] by nthj on Thursday March 06, 2014 @01:11PM (#7355497)
I see what you mean. I'd suggest that longer, more descriptive method names can help here, though. If I'm referring to a method body to understand what it does when reading another block of code, the method probably doesn't have a descriptive enough name.

https://signalvnoise.com/posts/3250-clarity-over-brevity-in-...