Timeline for Unit testing and other forms of testing
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2018 at 10:12 | comment | added | RubberDuck | @Laiv I’m not trying to start a flame war here. I agree with you, but it is still a testing pyramid after all. Integration & e2e tests are needed. | |
| Feb 28, 2018 at 10:00 | comment | added | Laiv | You can not prove a clock works just by proving all its forming pieces "isolated", works as expected. I don't think the sum of all the unit tests makes functional testing unnecessary. | |
| Feb 28, 2018 at 10:00 | comment | added | David Arno | @RubberDuck, I'd see that as being akin to manual optimisation: only do so if you need to. So if that integration test is slow or unreliable and isn't needed because what it is checking is properly covered by other tests, then sure, remove it. Otherwise, leave it in place. | |
| Feb 28, 2018 at 9:46 | comment | added | RubberDuck | I don’t know David. You might want to reduce the number of integration tests if the thing they test is now covered at a lower level (and you can prove it). | |
| Feb 28, 2018 at 9:35 | history | answered | David Arno | CC BY-SA 3.0 |