Testing: Difference between revisions
From ym2149.org
Jump to navigationJump to search
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
* manual testing is a terrible use of resource, invest in automated testing whenever possible | * manual testing is a terrible use of resource, invest in automated testing whenever possible | ||
* unit tests are supposed to be fast so developers can run them frequently without getting bored | * unit tests are supposed to be fast so developers can run them frequently without getting bored | ||
* your | * your 'test doubles' are dysfunctional if they involve writing things twice, use lightweight mocks | ||
* unit tests are for verifying behaviour and enforcing it | * unit tests are for verifying behaviour and enforcing it | ||
* an integration test can be used to check the parts unit tests can't reach, in particular that the service can communicate with its immediately adjacent services | * an integration test can be used to check the parts unit tests can't reach, in particular that the service can communicate with its immediately adjacent services | ||
Revision as of 18:15, 18 April 2024
- manual testing is a terrible use of resource, invest in automated testing whenever possible
- unit tests are supposed to be fast so developers can run them frequently without getting bored
- your 'test doubles' are dysfunctional if they involve writing things twice, use lightweight mocks
- unit tests are for verifying behaviour and enforcing it
- an integration test can be used to check the parts unit tests can't reach, in particular that the service can communicate with its immediately adjacent services
Analogy
- a dishwasher gets dishes clean by splashing them gently. if you tried that you'd get nowhere, but the machine is relentless and thorough - that's the difference between manual and automated testing
