On 21 Sep 2005, at 15:35, James Edward Gray II wrote:

> On Sep 21, 2005, at 5:23 PM, Warren Seltzer wrote:
>
>
>> Oh, yes, the Unit Tests, they're right, um, well, over here, um,  
>> lemme look ... Uh, I'll
>> get back to you on that...
>>
>
> We make jokes, but Unit Tests are a very real option.  The myth is  
> that they slow you down, but it's simply not true.  I code at  
> almost the exact same speed when doing Test Driven Development,  
> because it shaves off so much debugging time.  On top of that, I  
> end up trusting the code so much more.  Finally, it forces me to  
> get the interface right, since I'm always using it to write the  
> tests.  That's a LOT of gain for something that's very easy to do.

I use Unit Tests almost exclusively when writing Rails apps, and I  
only ever reload the page for styling.  Unit Tests let me declare  
exactly the behaviors I want and are much faster than switching to  
the web browser, reloading, finding I made a typo, switching back,  
correcting, repeat.  Even more so for changes that affect multiple  
pages, because I can be sure that every page I touch only has the  
changes I want in it and no more.

-- 
Eric Hodel - drbrain / segment7.net - http://segment7.net
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E  7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04