> Given that you've at minimum doubled the code (and doubled the bugs), it seems like a really bad long-term trade off.
I'd say you've at maximum doubled the code. The test ensures you write only what you need to get the test pass. Without them, devs get distracted and wander until the feature works. Usually distracting themselves with tons of YAGNI violations along the way. In my experience, untested code bases have a ton of unnecessary code.
I don't understand how it would double the bugs. The article has references saying it reduces them. But, even thinking about it, I don't see why you'd say that.
I'd say you've at maximum doubled the code. The test ensures you write only what you need to get the test pass. Without them, devs get distracted and wander until the feature works. Usually distracting themselves with tons of YAGNI violations along the way. In my experience, untested code bases have a ton of unnecessary code.
I don't understand how it would double the bugs. The article has references saying it reduces them. But, even thinking about it, I don't see why you'd say that.