Hacker News: ddfx

New comment by ddfx in "Ask HN: What's the largest amount of bad code you have ever seen work?"

ddfx — Thu, 15 Nov 2018 11:35:18 +0000

Integration tests are much slower usually, and you are testing tons of things at the same time. Something breaks (like in that example) and you have no idea of what and why went wrong.

If you unit test properly you are unit testing the business logic, that you have to properly divide and write in a modular fashion. If you want to test a more complex scenario, just add initial conditions or behaviors. If you can't do that or don't know how to do that, then you don't know what your code is doing or your code is bad designed. And that may be the case we read above.

Tests rarely break because they help you not breaking the code and functionalities, and they are so fast and efficient on making you realizing that that you don't feel the pain of it.

I can't imagine any example where "easy to unit test" != simple

New comment by ddfx in "Ask HN: What's the largest amount of bad code you have ever seen work?"

ddfx — Wed, 14 Nov 2018 19:25:18 +0000

I think TDD is the best way to develop (yet). Obviously tests are code, and if you write crappy highly-coupled tests you will end up with only much more messy code. This is a clear example of bad testing. The greatest advantage of TDD is in design, everything should be modular and easy to unit test, so you could:

- reproduce bug and verify your bugfix in matter of ms with proper unit test

- understand what code does

- change and refactor code whenever you want

You can tell from what is written that they are not following TDD. Redesign that codebase in an easy and clean to test design would require an exponential effort and time compared to have it done step by step, but it would be worth it

New comment by ddfx in "Ruby Warrior"

ddfx — Fri, 09 May 2014 18:34:41 +0000

from the website it looks like a UX/frontend courses company, I don't know how they plan to get good feedbacks with that