| Previous | Next |
| Speaker's notes: | You're probably already doing at least ad hoc testing at the interactive prompt. Why not get the most mileage out of that effort? Imagine if every little test that you already perform during development were somehow kept and could be rerun easily. |
|---|
| Speaker's notes: | Of course, you only find errors if you have written a test that exercises the particular functionality that's broken, but once you start writing unit tests, you may be surprised by how many errors you find. As you write test cases, you'll think, "Gee, I wonder whether I handle this case correctly," or, "Hm. I don't think that I handle this error correctly." When you're using a testing framework, you can simply add more test cases. The ease of adding new tests and running them encourages more thorough testing. Try it for a week, and you'll see what I mean. Many developers who have gotten in the habit of unit testing find programming without writing unit tests to be difficult and somewhat frightening. Programming is to driving like unit tests are to seat belts. |
|---|
| Speaker's notes: | In addition to finding errors in your code, unit testing can help you during the initial development of your class or module's public interface. Unit tests force you to think about how another developer will want to use your code while you're writing that code. This shift in focus can help you present a smaller, cleaner interface to your classes and modules. This benefit is most often associated with test-driven development. |
|---|
| Speaker's notes: | Imagine that you don't write test cases in code. You finish some module, and you start testing it at the interactive prompt. You realize that there's a tricky case your code doesn't handle correctly. A quick test reveals that you're right. You fix the module and move on. Later, you decide to rework the implementation of your module. Are you sure you didn't forget that tricky case? Can the new code handle it? If you had written test cases, you could just rerun the same set of tests (as long as the interface didn't change). As an added bonus, you can run your tests often so that you may find a bug after you've only written a few dozen lines of code. If a test suddenly fails, you know that it was introduced in the little bit of code you just changed. Not only is it easier to detect when you've introduced an error, but it is also easier to find the code that causes the error, reducing the time spent debugging. |
|---|
| Speaker's notes: | When you're writing code deep in a library or in a server side module for a user interface, a unit test gives you feedback as you work. You don't have to wait until after code in a separate part of the application is written before you can test and know whether your code works. Those little "throw-away" programs you may be writing to test your code become reusable unit tests attached to a consistent testing framework. |
|---|
| Speaker's notes: | Test cases provide minimal documentation about what you think your code should do. Tests don't necessarily explain why your code should behave the way shown, but they can explain how it should behave. In fact, some developers write their tests before they write their code. The tests define how the unit should behave. In this case, tests always fail at first. The programmer writes code until all of the tests are passing again. This style of programming called test-first programming or test-driven programming. Test-driven development also ensures that you have unit tests for all of your code since all of the code was developed to satisfy a test. |
|---|