heretoo
Joined 16 years ago
Joined 16 years ago
https://gist.github.com/antirez/6ca04dd191bdb82aad9fb241013e...
My gut is telling me erlang might have tackled this.
Actually, Kent Beck, who coined the term TDD, has the following to say in his book "Test Driven Development":
"In Test-Driven Development, we Write new code only if an automated test has failed"
This implies that in TDD the test is written first.
Regardless of any definition, test-first and test-last are just two ends of a scale we can use.
Side-effects in imports are, in my opinion, unnecessary, losing some of the benefits of static analysis, running with different parameters during tests, compiling to native code (if those tools exist), slowing things down, and more.
Libraries could have an initializer function and the problem would go away.
Where "cross your fingers" is equivalent to the "warrant canary has not been revoked" when encryption is involved.
50,000 serious injuries in one year seems considerable.
Noone agrees on the definition of any of these, and they have changed over the years. Wikipedia says they are the same https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmer
> Maybe try a hallucinagen
Is there strong evidence to support this is necessary? Which great computer programmers attribute their abilities to this?