Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by julius_set 2179 days ago
Can someone address the argument of:

Writing tests for everything (or almost everything) as proposed by TDD results in... more code to maintain.

This is the argument most teams have had that I’ve observed which resulted in little to no tests added.

I’ve seen above in both small teams (startups), and large orgs,
2 comments
ThrowawayR2 2179 days ago
Yes, more automated tests (TDD or not) do imply more code. The question is whether building and maintaining that code is cheaper than the fallout from the bugs that get through to the customer. And the answer to that is, after the team or product grows past a certain size, that equation always tilts in favor of having the tests.
link
empthought 2179 days ago
It only makes sense to write tests for behavior you don’t expect to change often. There is no point in writing a test for something that is incomplete or will obviously need to be changed.
link