Timeline for unit testing variable state explicit tests in dynamically typed languages
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 4, 2013 at 21:38 | vote | accept | Kris Welsh | ||
| Jul 2, 2013 at 20:50 | answer | added | ha9u63a7 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 20:39 | history | edited | Kris Welsh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a dynamically typed languages disclaimer to the title
|
| Jul 2, 2013 at 20:05 | comment | added | Kris Welsh | @RobertHarvey Sorry, yes this situation did occur in a dynamically typed language. | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 20:03 | answer | added | user2525572 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 19:57 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | Ehm, on items 1 and 2, only if you're working in a dynamically-typed language. In a statically-typed language, it won't compile if those two things aren't true. | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 19:57 | comment | added | Lee | The first two will never catch a situation the equality check won't, so I'd say this is over-complicating things. | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 19:56 | comment | added | Dan Pichelman | Is there any way that your specific tests could fail (i.e., catch a bug) that your more general test would pass? If "no", then you don't need the more specific tests. | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 19:50 | history | asked | Kris Welsh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |