[Xurinos]

I agree with this response. This is the same argument as for unit testing. When your code changes, you have to maintain your tests, too, sometimes throwing them out with the deleted code.

In other words, for any code change, you could have a test and a comment. And that is part of the job. The job is not just "write code". It is "write maintainable, bug free code".

[nostrademons]

The point of unit tests is to provide an executable specification. Ideally, the specification changes less frequently than the code does. In practice, the specification tends to change a lot too, but you should be able to perform optimizations or refactorings without having to change a whole lot of unit tests.

I know teams that have an "every change should break some unit test" policy, and IMNSHO those teams are making way more work for themselves than they need to. The point of tests is not to make sure that the code does what it does, the point is to make sure that it does what you need it to.

[Xurinos]

Well put. The same goes for comments, too. Someone else asserted that good comments should reflect "Why" more than "What". "What" changes more.