6 ms·
That seems like a massively inefficient way of doing things. Tests are very inexpensive since they can run without human intervention. Code review requires anot
by substack 15y ago
That seems like a massively inefficient way of doing things. Tests are very inexpensive since they can run without human intervention. Code review requires another human to sift through changes. If the automated tests pick something up first then the code reviewer wouldn't need to sink any time into a review in the first place.
- tomjen3 15y agoTests are less expensive to run than a codereview, but they take time to write, and rewrite, and rewrite (you software isn't perfect the first time).