我正致力于将单元测试集成到我所在团队的开发过程中,有一些人对此持怀疑态度。有什么好方法可以让团队中持怀疑态度的开发人员相信单元测试的价值?在我的具体情况下,我们将在添加功能或修复错误时添加单元测试。不幸的是,我们的代码库并不容易进行测试。
当前回答
关于单元测试要记住的一件事是,它对开发人员来说是一种安慰。
相反,功能测试是针对用户的:无论何时添加功能测试,您都是在测试用户将看到的东西。当您添加单元测试时,您只是让开发人员的生活更轻松。在这方面有点奢侈。
当您必须在编写单元或功能测试之间做出选择时,请记住这种二分法。
其他回答
在我们的办公室里,每天都有这样的对话:
“伙计,我就是喜欢单元测试,我刚刚能够对某些东西的工作方式进行了一系列更改,然后能够通过再次运行测试来确认我没有破坏任何东西……”
细节每天都在变化,但情绪却不变。单元测试和测试驱动开发(TDD)有很多隐藏的和个人的好处,也有很多明显的好处,除非他们自己做,否则你无法真正向他们解释。
但是,忽略这一点,下面是我的尝试!
Unit Tests allows you to make big changes to code quickly. You know it works now because you've run the tests, when you make the changes you need to make, you need to get the tests working again. This saves hours. TDD helps you to realise when to stop coding. Your tests give you confidence that you've done enough for now and can stop tweaking and move on to the next thing. The tests and the code work together to achieve better code. Your code could be bad / buggy. Your TEST could be bad / buggy. In TDD you are banking on the chances of both being bad / buggy being low. Often it's the test that needs fixing but that's still a good outcome. TDD helps with coding constipation. When faced with a large and daunting piece of work ahead writing the tests will get you moving quickly. Unit Tests help you really understand the design of the code you are working on. Instead of writing code to do something, you are starting by outlining all the conditions you are subjecting the code to and what outputs you'd expect from that. Unit Tests give you instant visual feedback, we all like the feeling of all those green lights when we've done. It's very satisfying. It's also much easier to pick up where you left off after an interruption because you can see where you got to - that next red light that needs fixing. Contrary to popular belief unit testing does not mean writing twice as much code, or coding slower. It's faster and more robust than coding without tests once you've got the hang of it. Test code itself is usually relatively trivial and doesn't add a big overhead to what you're doing. This is one you'll only believe when you're doing it :) I think it was Fowler who said: "Imperfect tests, run frequently, are much better than perfect tests that are never written at all". I interpret this as giving me permission to write tests where I think they'll be most useful even if the rest of my code coverage is woefully incomplete. Good unit tests can help document and define what something is supposed to do Unit tests help with code re-use. Migrate both your code and your tests to your new project. Tweak the code till the tests run again.
我参与的很多工作都没有很好地进行单元测试(web应用程序用户交互等),但即使如此,我们在这个商店里都被测试感染了,当我们把测试束缚住时,我们最高兴。我怎么极力推荐这种方法都不为过。
单元测试非常值得最初的投资。自从几年前开始使用单元测试以来,我发现了一些真正的好处:
回归测试消除了恐惧 对代码进行更改(什么都没有 就像看到代码的温暖光芒 每次有变化,要么工作,要么爆发 了) 以下的可执行代码示例 其他团队成员(包括你自己) 6个月的时间…) 无情的重构——这是令人难以置信的回报,试试吧!
代码片段可以极大地帮助减少创建测试的开销。创建能够在几秒钟内创建类大纲和相关单元测试fixture的代码片段并不困难。
你应该尽量少测试!
这意味着,您应该编写足够多的单元测试来揭示意图。这一点经常被掩盖。单元测试的成本很高。如果您进行了更改,并且必须更改测试,那么您将不那么敏捷。保持单元测试短小精悍。这样它们就有很大的价值。
我经常看到许多永远不会崩溃的测试,它们又大又笨拙,没有提供太多价值,它们最终只会拖慢你的速度。
Unit testing helps a lot in projects that are larger than any one developer can hold in their head. They allow you to run the unit test suite before checkin and discover if you broke something. This cuts down a lot on instances of having to sit and twiddle your thumbs while waiting for someone else to fix a bug they checked in, or going to the hassle of reverting their change so you can get some work done. It's also immensely valuable in refactoring, so you can be sure that the refactored code passes all the tests that the original code did.
Yes - Unit Testing is definitely worth the effort but you should know it's not a silver bullet. Unit Testing is work and you will have to work to keep the test updated and relevant as code changes but the value offered is worth the effort you have to put in. The ability to refactor with impunity is a huge benefit as you can always validate functionality by running your tests after any change code. The trick is to not get too hung up on exactly the unit-of-work you're testing or how you are scaffolding test requirements and when a unit-test is really a functional test, etc. People will argue about this stuff for hours on end and the reality is that any testing you do as your write code is better than not doing it. The other axiom is about quality and not quantity - I have seen code-bases with 1000's of test that are essentially meaningless as the rest don't really test anything useful or anything domain specific like business rules, etc of the particular domain. I've also seen codebases with 30% code coverage but the tests were relevant, meaningful and really awesome as they tested the core functionality of the code it was written for and expressed how the code should be used.
在探索新的框架或代码库时,我最喜欢的一个技巧是为“它”编写单元测试,以发现事物是如何工作的。这是一个学习新事物的好方法,而不是阅读枯燥的文档:)
推荐文章
- 为什么Visual Studio 2015/2017/2019测试运行器没有发现我的xUnit v2测试
- 单元测试反模式目录
- 类未找到:IntelliJ中的空测试套件
- Mockito的argumentCaptor的例子
- 单元测试:日期时间。现在
- 为什么单元测试中的代码不能找到包资源?
- 从导入的模块中模拟函数
- 在单元测试中设置HttpContext.Current.Session
- 何时使用Mockito.verify()?
- 在PHP单元测试执行期间,如何在CLI中输出?
- 单元测试的一些常用命名约定是什么?
- 如何直接从测试驱动程序调用自定义的Django manage.py命令?
- 如何重置笑话模拟函数调用计数之前,每次测试
- 在Python Django中运行单元测试时,如何禁用日志记录?
- 在子目录中测试Golang