Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
tyrrrz.me | ||
| | | | |
www.codesimplicity.com
|
|
| | | | | Much like we gain knowledge about the behavior of the physical universe via the scientific method, we gain knowledge about the behavior of our software via a system of assertion, observation, and experimentation called "testing." There are many things one could desire to know about a software system. It seems that most often we want to know if it actually behaves like we intended it to behave. That is, we wrote some code with a particular intention in mind, does it actually do that when we run it? In a sense, testing software is the reverse of the traditional scientific | |
| | | | |
nikoheikkila.fi
|
|
| | | | | How can we improve the developer experience in writing tedious browser-based tests? | |
| | | | |
www.hillelwayne.com
|
|
| | | | | I've been working on a bunch of longform obligation pieces and while they're a lot of fun, they're also steadily driving me insane. So I took a day off to write about all of the kinds of automated testing I know about. I'm defining tests here to be "an independent verification program that, as part of verification, executes the code we want to verify." This means types are not tests, as they don't involve execution of the code, and contracts are not tests, because they're not executed as an independent program. | |
| | | | |
nanotipsforvim.prose.sh
|
|
| | | |||
