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

偶尔,我自己或我的同事会花几个小时来研究一个不太明显的错误,一旦发现了错误的原因,90%的情况下代码都没有经过单元测试。单元测试并不存在,因为开发人员为了节省时间而偷工减料,但随后却失去了这一点和更多的调试。

花少量的时间来编写单元测试可以节省未来调试的时间。

其他回答

单元测试很像去健身房。你知道这对你有好处,所有的争论都有意义,所以你开始锻炼。刚开始有一种冲动,这很好,但几天后你开始怀疑是否值得这样做。你每天花一个小时换衣服,在仓鼠转轮上跑步,你不确定除了腿和手臂疼痛之外,你真的得到了什么。

然后,也许一两周后,就在疼痛消失的时候,一个重要的截止日期开始来临。你需要把醒着的每一个小时都用来完成“有用的”工作,所以你要去掉无关紧要的事情,比如去健身房。你改掉了这个习惯,当截止日期结束的时候,你又回到了起点。如果你设法回到健身房,你会觉得和你第一次去的时候一样酸痛。

You do some reading, to see if you're doing something wrong. You begin feel a little bit of irrational spite toward all the fit, happy people extolling the virtues of exercise. You realize that you don't have a lot in common. They don't have to drive 15 minutes out of the way to go to the gym; there is one in their building. They don't have to argue with anybody about the benefits of exercise; it is just something everybody does and accepts as important. When a Big Deadline approaches, they aren't told that exercise is unnecessary any more than your boss would ask you to stop eating.

所以,回答你的问题,单元测试通常是值得付出努力的,但是所需的努力量对每个人来说都不一样。如果你在一家不重视代码质量的公司处理意大利面条式的代码库,那么单元测试可能需要付出巨大的努力。(许多经理会歌颂单元测试,但这并不意味着他们会在关键时刻支持单元测试。)

如果你正试图将单元测试引入到你的工作中,并且没有看到你所期待的所有阳光和彩虹,不要责怪自己。你可能需要找一份新工作来真正让单元测试为你工作。

使用单元测试套件,可以在保持其余功能不变的情况下对代码进行更改。这是一个很大的优势。当你完成新功能的编码时,你会使用单元测试套件和回归测试套件吗?

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:)

你想说服谁?工程师还是经理?如果你试图说服你的工程师同事,我认为你最好的办法是迎合他们的愿望,让他们做出高质量的软件。有许多研究表明,它能发现漏洞,如果他们关心做好工作,这对他们来说就足够了。

如果您试图说服管理层,您将很可能不得不做一些成本/收益推理,说明未检测到的缺陷的成本大于编写测试的成本。一定要把不可转化的成本也包括在内,比如失去客户的信心等等。

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。