449
Do you have this guy at work? I do
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
449 points (95.5% liked)
Programmer Humor
37493 readers
271 users here now
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
- Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
- No NSFW content.
- Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Sure, refactoring is sometimes necessary. But refactoring also introduces new bugs often. Our code base is constantly being refactoring, and it's not more reliable, stuff is constantly breaking.
Tell me that you don't have a test suite without telling you don't have a test suite
Why are programmers so arrogant? They do have unit tests, and a dedicated test team. Refactoring can and does introduce bugs. It's a fact.
Frankly, if your test suite isn't catching 95% or more of the bugs, there's a problem with the test suite and if uat aren't catching 95% or more of the remainder, there's a problem with uat
How solid is the unit test coverage? What about regression tests? If you get new bugs creeping in all the time, your bug-catchers aren't doing their job
Yeah, I've said that before. I don't think they have enough regression tests, and unit tests.
I did a sting writing tests for a team that previously had none. Fun times, the things that were uncovered that day...
Refactoring for the sake of refactoring is rarely a good thing. It should be done with a clear purpose in mind.