• neclimdul@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I see it seemed more like a weird flex.

    Anyways, I couldnt possibly deploy with any confidence a large project or honestly a small project I expected someone to rely on without layers of test. Unintended consequences of even a small change are just a reality. And with the expectation to move quick with large legacy systems, if you don’t have tests that’s a dangerous high wire act.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Well, I’ve seen large projects without extensive unit tests before. The main time I remember a big project with them before coding agents they were largely a checkbox that developers implemented with a grumble when first deploying a new system and then that were slowly disabled one by one as later changes broke them.

      These were stand-alone projects, though, with a large QA department and without an expectation of future versions directly descended from them once deployed. If it worked then it worked, that was all that was needed at the end of the day.

      • neclimdul@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        never had a large qa team. And my experience has when we have qa resources, people move to the new feature so it’s up to the developers to not break the critical features everyone forgets about until they break. And I’ve yet to meet a developer that has time to also be a full time qa resource

    • neclimdul@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I meant my first sentence to be an apology for jumping to conclusions but it clearly isn’t. It’s late. Sorry for the snarky response.