|
|
|
|
|
by Someone
4906 days ago
|
|
"There's very little you can put in a language spec to improve test quality" You could require presence of unit tests with 100% code coverage (compile both in memory, run unit tests, write object file if 100% coverage) I'm pretty sure it would drive people crazy, though, and would have them write almost meaningless tests. 100% coverage isn't enough, either. |
|
Good to brainstorm though. But in my experience, anything that breaks flow (like those languages that refuse to compile if there's unused code, even if you've just commented something out for debugging) is a bad idea. Often it's nicest just to write the code, then write the unit tests once you've got the core idea down, rather than having to alternate between them at high frequencies.