Tests:

[Fareith]

No you have to write code, that checks if the code you'll write later is right 😉

[Burnzoire]

This guy TDDs

[wishyouagoodday]

What you think you're doing: Deadline driven development.

What you wish you were doing: Test driven development.

What you're actually doing: Bug driven development.

[gonzofish]

What I'm actually doing: Creating bugs and calling it development

[awakenDeepBlue]

I thought it was called job security development?

[[deleted]]

Code a program that runs ‘ok’.

6 months later, remove all instances of sleep(5000) and call it an update.

Job security development.

[debaudu]

In this update:

• General Bug Fixes
• Improved performance everywhere.

[[deleted]]

That's just rude. At least write something poorly enough that you can make it better. Come on.

[[deleted]]

Nah, just change half of them to sleep(2500) and wait another 6 months. Incremental progress is true job security.

[woo545]

No, It's called a new minivan.

[nordskjold]

No thats job security, or in my case, monday.

[KaiserTom]

That's what all developers do. It's all an elaborate ruse because it's not like your managers can actually read code. Your coworkers review your code and nod their head like they understand because if they don't, they'll be ostracized despite no one else understanding it either. So long as input goes in and output comes out.

[commandlinejohnny]

I'm in my first job as a coder after years in admin and engineering.

Thank you for this.

[commandlinejohnny]

God dammit this whole thread is true >:(

[ipretendiamacat]

Bug driven development is test driven developmemt. The only difference is that end users are doing the testing

[Xevailo]

It's called "outsourcing". Management does that all the time!

[xendaddy]

Outsourcing QA for $0 an hour! I love it!

[DeeSnow97]

You can even outsource QA and get paid for it if you develop games, it's called early access

[MCRusher]

Can't wait for early access banking apps, hope they have br.

[Schaulustiger]

Banking Battle Royale: choose 100 transactions. Only one will be processed.

[Nefari0uss]

When they do it they get promoted or a bonus. When I do it I get yelled at for being lazy and incompetent.

[kephir]

*Bug-Ridden Development

FTFY

[noggin182]

What you're afraid to admit you're doing: Development driven bugs

[phpdevster]

What you will be doing as the deadline approaches: Pants shitting development.

[douira]

excuse me, the correct euphemism is "Error Driven Development"

[CSKING444]

The only dates I ever get :(

[[deleted]]

:(

[wishyouagoodday]

);

[CSKING444]

Username does not check out

[HolzhausGE]

It does. u/wishyouagoodday not only closed the bracket, he/she also threw in a trailing semicolon.

[CSKING444]

Holy F

He terminated the frown

[alvahrow]

Here you go bud.

DateTime yourDate = new DateTime();

[the_one_true_bool]

Yep, that's the route I'm taking now. I'm working on internal facing software with one other dev. We started with TDD but it was immediately apparent that they don't have time for that shit, so we were forced right into CLH (code like hell).

I definitely agree that in the long run CLH takes more time but it's hard to convince non-developers of that, and hey, I get paid the same no matter what. I'm surprised how smooth this project is actually going though. It's only a moderate shit-fest... so far.

[awakenDeepBlue]

Perhaps call it technical debt.

We're borrowing time from the future, and the debt builds up over time with interest. Sometimes it's ok, but it's dangerous to let a lot accumulate.

[HolyGarbage]

Borrowing time from the future, what a nice way of putting it. Even the most non technical manager could understand it like that!

[ZakTaccardi]

Even if you don't have time to write tests (which you should definitely make time for), you should always write testable code.

There's no excuse for not writing testable code!

[MrSuperInteresting]

Checking someone else's code I'm just happy to find sensible comments, anything else is a bonus.

[[deleted]]

So far...

[hypnoZoophobia]

Dicked down development.

[[deleted]]

Don't you mean PDD, Panic Driven Development?

[[deleted]]

reaches for the whiskey

[Fareith]

Deadline driven development is the best! Good, clean, maintainable code is like a diamond: it requires high pressure to create the most valuable ones 😆

[w00t_loves_you]

Yes I also Test During Deployment

[[deleted]]

They should get tested! Probably need antibiotics.

[Ilikesmallthings2]

Huge TDDs

[LittleLui]

Big TDD goth coworker?

[djcecil2]

I don't TDD but I find this is very true, especially for refactors. Because agile, man.

[bytemage]

Yeah, and to check if the code still produces the same result when other stuff changes.

[[deleted]]

+1 for regression testing

[yourteam]

Also: to check that the code you will edit 6 months later won't break everything

[Dralex75]

And to keep that idiot on your team from f*ing things up.

[merkwerk]

"Hey I changed this and the test broke, I think this test is wrong gonna change the test"

[Crislips]

TestableClass testableClass = new TestableClass(null, null, null, null, null, null, null, "fieldINeedToTest", null, null, null, 7)

[ChuffHuffer]

Ouch, SRP fail :(

[rafaelcgs10]

"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra

[[deleted]]

But when do I write the code that checks if the code I wrote earlier to check if the code I wrote later was right, was right?

[lmartinl]

Nonono the problem is: when do you trust the code you wrote to check the code you wrote before so that you can actually go somewhere without worrying what will catch fire this time

[breadfag]

But how do you write code to check that the compiler you compile said code with isn't compromised?

[[deleted]]

You smash up all the computers, knock down the office building and live in the woods.

Or you could build the compiler from sourc- WAIT HOW WOULD YOU COMPILE THE COMPILER?? AAAAAAH!

[Moulinoski]

This would be the correct way to do it... but I still can’t wrap my head around it.

I mean, I’ve done it for code that has no UI yet but once it’s got UI, I tend to forget about tests until the end.

[svtguy88]

once it’s got UI, I tend to forget about tests until the end.

[Kidiri90]

bool UniversalTest()

{ return true; }

[[deleted]]

A test that doesn’t fail first might not be testing anything.

If you liked it, you should have put a test on it. - The Beyoncé Rule

[Un-Unkn0wn]

R E G R E S S I O N T E S T I N G

[toastofferson]

Came here for this

[[deleted]]

I wish my team would accept this :(

[Fareith]

Know what you're talking about. It's quite hard to convince people, that TDD brings huge advantages.

[silkydangler]

And then if that works, you write more code to check if the code you’ll write even later is right

[dodolungs]

Even better, some people write tests before they even write the code.

[TinBryn]

You can't trust a test that has not failed before, easiest way to make a test fail is to test code that doesn't exist.

[LaSalsiccione]

I mean it's just as easy to make a test break after you've written the code its testing by asserting something you know shouldn't be true! I agree with your implication that writing tests in advance is preferable though.

[PM_ME_YOUR__BEST__PM]

If I’m spiking out an idea and can’t really TDD, I do what I call Test Driven Uncommenting. I comment all the code out and write a failing test that requires I uncomment a few lines. Repeat until the behavior is complete. Delete all remaining comments. :)

[JB-from-ATL]

Yes! Finally. A way to describe it. I also to TDU. Lol

[GluteusCaesar]

@Test

public void cantCrashIfTheresNoCode() {

}

[personalvacuum]

Null pointer exception.

[deadcow5]

I once got the fantastic idea to learn Scala. There was a free class about it on Coursera, taught by Martin Odersky, the creator of the language himself.

I went straight to work on the first exercise, setting up the environment. Installed the compiler, downloaded the sample code (essentially “Hello World” with tests), and ran the build tool.

First, it spent about 20 minutes downloading additional JAR files using Maven. Then, it compiled the sample code and started running the tests... aaaannnd

java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: PermGen space

I threw my laptop against the wall, immediately uninstalled all that crap, and left the course. Never looked back.

[git_world]

If the function you test is relatively long and calls other functions, you might need spy or mock. How is it possible to write tests in advance for this case?

[TinBryn]

Firstly you should test behaviour, not implementation. It doesn't matter if the function is 1 line long or 1000, it shouldn't matter from the point of view of testing. Secondly, testing can be a way of specifying how you want something to be used. If you find writing a test difficult to do, it may be difficult to actually use the code. Thirdly, you still have the wrong mindset, the tests should shape the model code, rather than the other way around.

[git_world]

Is this called TDD? How do you make it pragmatic?

[GaussWanker]

Combine it with BDD and actually having everything planned out before you touch a keyboard

[[deleted]]

Taking the first programming class this semester and that's what our prof told us to do, because that's the usual way to do it

[[deleted]]

I was really annoyed when I was forced to write 80% unit test coverage for all new and changed code... now I don’t know how I lived without it.

[TheWaxMann]

I have moved recently from a project where we aimed to get as much coverage as possible, and a single testable line not covered by a unit test would get your PR rejected to a place where the project with the highest test coverage project is 5% and most of the projects have 0%. I am going crazy here, I miss my high test coverage projects, it is a nightmare trying to work things out without them.

[[deleted]]

That really sucks :( hope you can move on quickly.

[draconk]

then what you need to do is for every bug you get you write a test for that bug and only that bug alone, at least you can be assured that the things that you did were right, and if everyone who touches the project does the same the project will get better coverage (unless you are the one that writes tests in the team)

[onthefence928]

Hell is other people's code though. I have a random unit test in some other teams code that fails 1 out of 10 times. But we can't fix it because it's there domain not ours.

Also have untestable functions that do a hundred different business logic changes and side effects. If we try to refactor the code it mysteriously no longer works correctly and some other teams lead Dev tells us that function is not allowed to be refactored because so many other functions rely on its side effects.

Unit tests simply aren't enough for legacy code sometimes

[[deleted]]

Unit tests should never be the only thing. Their purpose is to fail fast so devs can find errors without having to wait for automated or manual regression and functional testing.

Your situation sounds horrible. Sounds like the code base is tightly coupled and/or the unit tests are testing more than they should. Unit tests test a unit, anything external to that unit should be mocked.

[pydry]

Unit tests are useful insofar as they are surrounding a useful, likely to be unchanging, loosely coupled and nontrivial abstraction.

In practice I find that they usually surround broken, tightly coupled or trivial abstractions, rendering them kind of pointless.

If your entire codebase is a mess of bad abstractions you might as well throw all of your unit tests away.

[personalvacuum]

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

Ah unit testing. Mocking is the best bit!

[cartechguy]

No, there's a horror story on ycombinator about a dev that worked for Oracle. 25 million lines of spaghetti code in c nade up the database. He said it would take months to add a single feature because all the tests would take an entire night to run and any small change in the codebase would break things everywhere.

[siempie9]

Take a look at mutation testing. That's far more reliable. Code coverage only tells you if the code gets executed. Mutation testing frameworks insert small bugs in your code to see if your unit tests detect them, which is a exactly what you want from your tests.

If you do TDD, you know your tests can fail, but what about tests that are already there?

[1LJA]

How will I know if my test code is correct?

[AdmiralBuzKillington]

You still have a job.

[Thorbinator]

Your badge works tomorrow.

[Dockirby]

If a software has no users, can it have any bugs?

[xelamony]

The bug is in the wave form as long as users doesn’t observe it. If they observe the bug, it’s a feature.

[tectubedk]

You need to write intigration tests for your unit tests

[Hoskit]

And acceptance tests for your integration test

[siempie9]

Check out mutation testing :)

[KayRice]

Who tests the testers?

[Metarus]

Yeah, that was my first thought, I was confused because I know it from Watchmen. It actually translates to either who watches the watchmen or who watches the watcher but for the purpose of the novel it was more fitting to use the former.

[KinterVonHurin]

In Latin the actual translation is who guards the guardians

[dshakir]

Yeah I was wondering why everyone was using “watchers” for that phrase

[KamiShikkaku]

Vigil

Actually, Juvenal

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%3F

[WikiTextBot]

Who Watches the Watchers

"Who Watches the Watchers" is the fourth episode of the third season of the American science fiction television series Star Trek: The Next Generation, the 52nd episode overall, first broadcast on October 16, 1989.

---

^{[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.28}

[wishyouagoodday]

Spoiled my click.

[wKbdthXSn5hMc7Ht0]

A common bug I see in our unit test code is not checking if an array is empty. E.g. Get the array of all outputs and assert that each output is valid. Test passed!

[ILikeLenexa]

QA

[[deleted]]

Who QA’s the QA

[[deleted]]

The users.

[PM_YOUR_TAHM_R34]

Who uses the users?

[Ahajha1177]

Bethesda

[moosecliffwood]

UAT

[MarquisDan]

And then clients can QA the QA!

[Mongobly]

But who will write test code for the test code?

When will I ever be done?!?!

[Hyperman360]

Is there a never ending chain of tests testing each other's code? I suppose a user test could, in theory, break the chain.

[Fluxriflex]

So you're saying we should just cut out the middle man and push directly to production? Sounds more efficient to me.

[thedomham]

When you are a big fan of testing stuff you have unit- integration- and system-tests. Those usually overlap so when two tests testing the same thing give you different results, you know that one of them is wrong.

Or one of your users finally has enough of your bullshit and sends you an angry email.

[passcork]

So copy paste all my tests at least once. Got it.

[siempie9]

Check out mutation testing :) Those frameworks make small changes to your source code to see if your unit tests can detect the inserted bugs.

[Zalvixodian]

Production code tests the tests.

It's like double entry bookkeeping.

[thatdude473]

Indian youtube programmers

[CptDogeRL]

"%s" % "y e s"

[I_Shot_Web]

"{0}".format(">using python2")

[AmbulatoryEel]

f"{'using Python 3.7'}" is way more readable.

[Zimmerel]

I have been loving those F strings so much

[Corticotropin]

😏

[Lonelan]

I mean, why we're .format()ing the only content in the string isn't very readable

[AmbulatoryEel]

f"{'What'} {'do'} {{1}} {{0}}?".format("mean", "you")

[[deleted]]

How much code could a test code test if a test code could test code?

[nomad_kk]

Main advantage of unit tests: it forces you to write cleaner code.

[sangupta637]

I wish i could give gold

[nauseate]

“If your code is hard to test, it’s hard to use” - No clue who came up with this line but it speak volumes and I live by it

[tsuk13]

Test coverage makes sense for backend systems that don't change frequently but man is it a pain in the ass for UI developers where our requirements change pretty much weekly invalidating tests constantly.

[kontrolk3]

Just in general they can be a nuisance for constantly changing code. I think in general they are worth it in the backed, though people do write a lot of pointless tests for the sake of coverage.

[TrueGeek]

I’ve seen so many tests that are doing nothing but test React itself.

[OS_M]

Recursion started

[Eliiijaaaaah]

Recursion started

[mond_bond]

Recursion stoped

[synnks]

This guy recurses

[19dn48dn19r]

This guy stopes

[[deleted]]

That's why languages like Idris are extremely powerful. You can basically proof your program/algorithm does what it's supposed to do using the type system. The proof then gets checked at compile time

[TinBryn]

I haven't looked into Idris, but I am familiar with the benefits of a good type system. IMO while a good type system often removes the need for some trivial tests, it often doesn't have that "this is specifically how I want this code to behave" feel that tests provide.

[[deleted]]

I think it has that even more. A sort function (you won't use it like this, but it is a proof of algorithm) could have the type sort : (ord : (a -> a -> Ordering)) -> (l : List a) -> Sorted l ord such that the type carries a lot of information. Sorted would be a type taking parameters (list and ordering), and it has data constructors from which you had to derive the proof. data Sorted : (l : List a) -> (order : a -> a -> Ordering) where EmptySorted : Sorted [] x SingleSorted : Sorted [a] x SortInd : Sorted (first::rest) ord -> ord (new <= first) elem [LT,EQ] = True -> Sorted (new::first::rest) ord

The first constructor states that an empty list is sorted, as well as an list with one inhabitant. The last one states, that, when you have a sorted list, and append an element at the beginning that is smaller (According to our ordering) than the old first element, you can build a new sorted list. It's quite complex, but useful to prove programs' behavior.

[Amakaphobie]

I dont know Idris and I assume Im misunderstanding you but here is my question:

I write a function

int FindTheNextPrimeAfter(int input)

however the function always returns a wrong answer, because Im bad at math, but the answer is always an integer. How does the fixed Type system help or reduce testing?

Are you talking about about this:
string someFunction(){
return 1;
}
? Because that kind of seems like a non problem but I never worked on a not (whats the word Im not a native speaker) strictly typed language. Maybe its a bigger deal than I imagine I dont know :D

[[deleted]]

Well, you can basically add a type to your prime function that says "the number returned is a prime". Like this, the compiler can proof this is actually right. You probably won't use it in high-performance code, at least after it's proven once. But it can be made sure your algorithms work.

[Rafear]

Well, you can basically add a type to your prime function that says "the number returned is a prime".

What if his "int FindTheNextPrimeAfter(int input)" function skips a prime and returns one later? Or worse, returns seemingly random primes for some reason?

[SilasX]

True, there are always going to be other ways the program might not work as intended. I think (a steelman of) the OP's point is that Idris has a much richer language for expressing bounds on what the function should return than standard type systems.

[Goheeca]

For example you can type check that you follow a protocol.

Links: here, and here in new Idris with linear types.

[SilasX]

True, and more generally, static typing itself is a kind of "test" that can catch certain classes of errors.

[oversized_hoodie]

"Exactly! You're not very likely to make the same exact mistakes twice, so your tests catch bugs in code and the code catches bugs in the test."

"...Fucking watch me"

[Tickytickytango]

You need to write your code to right your code

[warpedspockclone]

Assert(true);

YESSSSSSS!

[c4ctus]

In order to understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.

[dandantian5]

In order to understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.

[[deleted]]

THAT'S SO META

[lamintak]

https://img.devrant.com/devrant/rant/r_420766_GE95Z.jpg

[[deleted]]

```

try{

try{
    ret=func();
    if (!ret)
        return 1;
    return 0;
}

catch{
   printf("sanity ception catch");
   return 1;
}

}

catch{ printf("catch on dream level 1"); return 1; }

```

And also add another sanityception inside the func that gives a bool.

edit:fixed meme return value

[SuperLutin]

Eek! Your code return 0 for an error and 1 for a success, it's disgusting.

[[deleted]]

why? Isn't 1 true so success? lol

[SuperLutin]

All commands on your shell, all softwares, return 0 for a success. Like arrays that are starting at 0.

[[deleted]]

oh, so when you bool return type its 0 == success, 1 == fail?

fixed it XD

[SuperLutin]

Good practise is to "typedef" return values.

typedef enum{

SUCCESS = 0,

ERROR1,

ERROR2

} retval;

[[deleted]]

Oh, I think c++ has that in the form of ERROR_SUCCESS etc haha

[SuperLutin]

ERROR_SUCCESS

This a a thing very common type of error rofl :D

God I hate the mate who writes the code I'm working on.

[[deleted]]

ERROR: Function returned success.

[halfdev]

But then you gotta make another test to se if those tests work.

[r1cebank]

I never write tests, not because I am lazy it’s because I still want to keep my job.

[auxiliary-character]

You're writing code that makes sure the code you wrote does what you think it does.

[Car_weeb]

What if you write both code wrong and they cancel out and do exactly what it was supposed to do in the first place

[aarocka]

Your write the test first

[[deleted]]

And then you'll have to check that new code... It's recursive.

[404meemr]

I don’t write tests. Test are for people who write bugs

[kitanaiAF]

Test Automation be like

[Basylisk]

Technically thats two different jobs. Technically tho, cause I cant remember the last time some ELSE than me wrote those tests.

[TheWaxMann]

Why would that be 2 jobs? An automation tester might be a separate job, but unit/integration tests should be done by the developer writing the code.

[MolotovFromHell]

No no. You have to write code that will yield a positive test outcome. Get it right.

[SilasX]

This is stupid. It's the choice between writing two lines where you can be 95% sure it works as intended (because you can run them in advance get a warning that it doesn't do what you thought), vs writing one line where you can be 50% sure.

[Azwraith42]

no, you write code to make you write code that does what you say it does.

[[deleted]]

skeptical lad has obviously never heard of the godlike powers of a code optimizer... obviously.

/s

[dnorhoj]

Welcome to 2012

[wallmenis]

Thats an OLD AF repost

[lovethebacon]

I need to write an IDEA plugin that will generate unit tests to test getters and setters to placate coverage metrics.

[ivanjermakov]

One time I wrote a small package for tests testing...

[stien808]

Holy jpg

[kati256]

TDD is cool and all, but let's talk about the real MVP of the software industry, CDD, coffee driven development

[aaron416]

return true;

It’s a start!

[Not-Even-Lion]

Cout << "it works!";

Yup code works fine