Why Unit Test

[Marc Clifton]

Ravi Bhavnani wrote:

Clickety[^]

True, but I've never tried, as I expect to be disappointed. Have you tried it? Marc

Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!

[VijayPd]

Ravi, I agree wid u. I also face this problem several times.

[Ravi Bhavnani]

No, I haven't tried it.  I've been building my unit tests manually so far.  Admittedly, I don't test every method and property - just (what I deem to be) points of failure. /ravi

My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com

[Daniel Pfeffer]

Thanks for the link. It's always useful to read a different perspective on an important subject.

If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill

[Behzad Sedighzadeh]

You are absolutely right!

Behzad

[menomey]

booooring

[carlospc1970]

oh! Thank you! :) :thumbsup:

[Dan Neely]

I haven't either; but it looks like it's just a test stub generator. You'd still have to do the hard work of writing any non-trivial setup code, and then actually writing meaningful test content. The one in VS08/10 was a major waste of time IMO; and it appears MS agrees with me since based on the comments there they yanked it from 2012. I've also played a bit with MS's automagic unit testing tool back around the New Year. While it fell well short of its "cover your legacy code in a single button click" hype; if you're writing readily testable code now it seemed like it might be able to generate good test coverage of it. Things like non-trivial state setup, logic in winform event handlers, or classes with tight coupling to the file system all defeated it; unfortunately my un-unit tested legacy .net code is riddled with those constructs making it mostly useless to me. (Even aside from only having MSDN pro - and the feature apparently being limited to the rebranded Premium tier.)

Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt

[madprogrammi]

I've never unit tested. Unless running the program in a debugger, handing my keyboard to a small child, and telling them "Smash a ton of keys" counts. :laugh:

When I talk to people who don't even know what source code is, I open an editor window and say "This is what we go through every time you find a bug!"

[SeattleC]

No, there are worse things many times more boring than unit testing. Like spending three months looking for a decent job because your last company imploded due to all the unfixed bugs. Like spending a week hunting for a bug in your colleague's code who thought unit testing was boring so he didn't bother. Like waiting six months for your cool new feature to go live because your testing organization only does system test, and therefore can only afford to release twice a year.

[Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan]

I have read that eBook, that was an amazing and outstanding eBook of yours Marc. Now, I really know what Unit is, what Test is and what Unit Test is. :) Thanks a lot Marc, for such extraordinary help of yours. :)

The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~

[TNCaver]

A related question is: are there any studies that show implementing unit testing and TDD has decreased the number of bugs in released programs than old-fashioned testing methods?

If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.