[chamomeal]

It’ll cheat a lot when writing unit tests. Particularly “agentic” tools like cursor. It’ll get a test to pass, even if it’s against a laughably incorrect implementation.

I’ve ended up with tests called stuff like “foobar successfully returns impossible value that suggests programmer error” lmao

[mikeocool]

My favorite thing Claude code has been doing recently is adding second totally separate implementation of whatever I asked it to write tests for, and writing the tests against that.

Conveniently, when it then changes the original implementation, the tests don’t fail!

[queenkjuul]

This is just about the only type of test i see it write lol

[cmrdporcupine]

Yeah, or "bug was pre-existing and not my fault so shrug, here's a TODO and we'll just say it passed" (not those exact words, but close)

[csar]

“70% of tests pass. This codebase is ready for production!”