Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

9
  • 1
    Have you looked at my example? This happened all the time. The point is, when I implement a new feature I change/add the unit test so that they test the new feature - therefore no unit test will be broken. In most cases I have side effects of the changes which are not detected by unit tests - because the environment is mocked. In my experience because of this no unit test ever told me that I have broken a existing feature. It was always the integration and acceptance tests which showed me my mistakes. Commented Jan 17, 2014 at 8:07
  • As for the execution time. With a growing application I have mostly a growing number of isolated components. If not I have done something wrong. When I implement a new feature it is mostly only in a limited number of components. I write one or more acceptance tests in scope of the whole application - which could be slow. Additionally I write the same tests from the components point of view - this tests are fast, because the components are usually fast. I can execute the component tests all the time, because they are fast enough. Commented Jan 17, 2014 at 8:12
  • @Yggdrasil As I said, unit tests are not all mighty, but they are usually the first layer of testing, since they are the fastest. Other tests are also useful, and should be combined. Commented Jan 17, 2014 at 8:14
  • 1
    Just because they are faster does not mean, that they should be used just because of this or because it is common to write those. Like I said my unit tests do not break - so they do not have any value for me. Commented Jan 17, 2014 at 14:44
  • 1
    The question was, what value do I have from unit test, when they do not break? Why bother writing them, when I always need to adjust them to new requirements? The only value from them I see is for algorithms and other classes with a high permutation. But these are less than the component and acceptance tests. Commented Jan 18, 2014 at 18:07