[zo7]

> A far better way to write tests is within your production code. Validate every parameter and every assumption. Raise errors when possible, log everything else.

> It runs when you testers, and customers use the applications.

Do you rely on any sort of automated testing to catch errors before it gets to your customers? From a business standpoint it doesn't feel right to offload testing to your users, especially in more critical systems.

[valuearb]

Our testing is by hand, we have a QA lead and entire team helps.

Verification isn’t offloading testing, it’s monotoring real world usage to find out where it differs from testing. The hard part is the logs can be a torrent of data, you need to have a process to monitor and escalate.

i’d like to automate testing. But it has to be no more work than manual testing, and/or it has to be as effective or better than manual testing. And i can’t see either of those being true.

Most of my bugs can’t be caught by unit tests. For example one common category is where previous devs made assumptions where code normally works fine, but fails in specific edge cases from multiple thread timing or view controllers being disposed. i don’t know how to automate those tests.