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
我是一名维护工程师,负责一个文档记录不佳、糟糕而庞大的代码库。我希望编写代码的人已经为它编写了单元测试。 每次我进行更改和更新产品代码时,我都担心自己可能会因为没有考虑某些条件而引入错误。 如果他们编写测试,那么对代码库的更改就会更容易、更快。(与此同时,代码库将处于更好的状态)..
我认为,在编写api或框架时,单元测试非常有用,因为这些api或框架必须持续多年,并由原始编码器以外的人使用/修改/发展。
其他回答
根据我的经验,在复杂的软件环境中,单元测试和集成测试是“必须的”。
为了说服团队中的开发人员编写单元测试,您可能需要考虑在开发环境中集成单元测试回归分析(例如,在您的日常构建过程中)。
一旦开发人员知道如果单元测试失败,他们就不必花那么多时间调试它来发现问题,他们就会更有动力去编写这些测试。
这里有一个工具可以提供这样的功能:
单元测试回归分析工具
单元测试适用于QA人员或你的经理,而不是你;所以绝对不值得。
您应该专注于编写正确的代码(不管这意味着什么),而不是测试用例。让其他人去担心吧。
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。
就在今天,我不得不更改一个类,之前已经为其编写了单元测试。 测试本身写得很好,包括我甚至没有想过的测试场景。 幸运的是,所有测试都通过了,我的更改很快得到了验证,并自信地放到了测试环境中。
单元测试的好处之一是可预测性。
在单元测试之前,我可以非常准确地预测编写代码所需的时间,但无法预测调试所需的时间。
现在,因为我可以计划将要编写什么测试,所以我知道编码需要多长时间,并且在编码结束时,系统已经调试好了!这为开发过程带来了可预见性,消除了许多压力,但仍然保留了所有的乐趣!!
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