|
|
|
|
|
|
by barrowclift
2314 days ago
|
|
|
Bit of a disappointing read for me. Given the title, I was expecting more "meat" to the topic, like more details about why and how the author is now warming up to unit tests, anything to get the article beyond a surface-level summary of events. Right now, it simply reads "I didn't previously unit test, then I read some books, and now I do". Seems to me writing like this is best served with a few book recommendation tweets and doesn't really make sense in this format. |
|
|
Why:
Mostly, I think it's down to having a better understanding of where to try to break dependencies, specifically trying to abstract away from the outside world (akin to how they did it in the Moonpig billing system).
The how is still in progress. Perhaps the most notable instance I can think of it is that recently, due to work on breaking dependencies, I was able to stub out a RabbitMQ connection for an in-memory class, so that I was able to easily test how two components interacted without having to stand up an external service.
For me, looking back, I think it was the Moonpig article that's had the most influence on how I think about things.
Do you have any other questions?