loading...

re: What does your Test Cover? VIEW POST

FULL DISCUSSION
 

I expect that tests which cover logic over layout provides the most benefit.

I've at least found that if the developers are solid at writing unit tests for their code, having QA tests that cover logic is mostly redundant. HTML template issues are more what I catch at that point. I still write the tests as we need to make sure the functionality is solid, but it does feel somewhat useless at times. For the most part, I have to follow the policies of my employer, so it's not beneficial to do an analysis of what provides the most value as I'm just an individual contributor. I have to provide the same metrics as everyone else at the end of a sprint, so I have to write the same kinds of test coverage as everyone else. It'd be nice if projects could dictate what coverage means, but that's not how my place works.

What are testing types you find falsely claiming failures needing great maintenance and not carrying their weight?

Validating file contents :| So many weird node errors without much context, meanwhile, the file itself was fine and not an empty string as it claimed.

 

Oh yes the test coverage metrics. I've had freedom to define "good enough" per project and now that I'm getting to guide testing consistency across projects/groups I'm trying to stay clear of metrics which don't focus on cost/benefit analysis. But the pull from upper management to "just test everything" is always there.

code of conduct - report abuse