this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2024
938 points (98.4% liked)

Programmer Humor

32051 readers
1655 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Yeah, but I think apparently the tests that "could" have caught it relied on mocks which basically rendered it useless in those cases.

[–] teejay@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

Ah yes. The unintended consequences of mandated code coverage without reviewing the tests. If you can mock the shit out of the test conditions to always give you exactly the answer you want, what's the point of the test?

It's like being allowed to write your own final exam, and all you need to pass the exam is 90% correct on the questions you wrote for yourself.

[–] marlowe221@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

And this is why mocks are bad…

[–] CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago

Unit tests, yes, but you don't only do unit tests. Integration and e2e tests still exist.