Darren New wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> On 06/03/10 11:47, Darren New wrote:
>>>> On top of that, any kind of testing is going to be easier if a
>>>> function's output depends only on its current inputs...
>>> Yep. The problem with "unit testing" per se is that it only tests a
>>> unit. It doesn't test anything except the invariants of the unit you're
>>> testing.
>>
>>     I wouldn't call it a "problem".
> 
> Well, a limitation.  I do very little programming where the invariants 
> of the class are particularly difficult to ensure.  That would be 
> "datastructures" and "file systems", which I use system/language 
> libraries for.

Or, to rephrase, sure, a SQL server can have gazillions of unit tests that 
make sense. But I don't write SQL servers. That's been done. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    Eiffel - The language that lets you specify exactly
    that the code does what you think it does, even if
    it doesn't do what you wanted.

Post a reply to this message