[randomdata]

Implying that integration tests (or vice versa) are legally incorporated like cities, while unit tests are not? What value is there in recognizing a test as a legal entity? Does the, assuming US, legal system even allow incorporation of code? Frankly, I don't think your comparison works.

[rileymat2]

I think he is not implying a hard line legal standard but as connections and size increase different properties start to emerge humans start to differentiate things based on that, but there is a gradient so we can find examples that are hard to classify.

[randomdata]

What differentiates a city from a village is legal status, not size. If size means population, there are cities with 400 inhabitants, villages with 30,000 inhabitants, and vice versa. It is not clear how this pertains to tests.

When unit test was coined, it referred to a test that is isolated from other tests. Integration tests are also isolated from other tests. There is no difference. Again, the post facto attempts to differentiate them all fall flat, pointing to things that have no relevance.

[drewcoo]

> What differentiates a city from a village is legal status, not size

Fine. And legal status depends on location. There are many localities.

[randomdata]

Yup, just like testing. Integration and unit tests depend on location as no two locations can agree on what the terms mean – because all definitions that attempt to differentiate them are ultimately nonsensical. At the end of the day they are the exact same thing.