• vanillama@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Agreed, you find the right shape for the code as you build and try stuff, adding the tests right after makes most sense, unless maybe you’re just testing an API or something

    • Zannsolo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      I mean I’m theory for any planned method you would know the input and expected output before the coffee is written.

      • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        Except that then you’ll shape your interfaces to drive tests nicely, instead of being, you know, sane and useful (been there, done that).

        • 3abas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          Unit tested test for accuracy, if your code isn’t “shaped to drive tests nicely”, it’s bad code.

          They enforce requirements. You do start with code, you start with the “shape”, you architect how your application should be developed and you write unit tests for the functions you already know you want but haven’t written the logic to yet, the unit test validates the logic so you don’t spend 2 hours hunting down a missing negative sign.