J B Rainsberger Integrated Tests Are A Scam HD

Why HN readers recommended it

HN recommends it in testing-strategy debates as the classic case for fewer integration tests and more small, well-contracted unit tests.

This is a summary from the source dataset, not an endorsement by Hacker News or the video creator.

Video & recommendation details

Creator / channel

Christopher Cabanne

Topic

software testing strategy

Format

talk

Level

intermediate

HN recommenders in dataset

4

HN mentions in dataset

6

Recommendation years in dataset

2017–2023

These counts and years describe the included Hacker News records; they are not YouTube views or the video’s publication date.

From the original HN conversations

Excerpts from the recorded comments. Follow each source for the full comment and surrounding discussion.

• Trying to cover your state space with coarse-grained tests in database-backed applications can lead to slow tests suites that are laborious to set up/tear down, which is a barrier to fast build times in CI. This harms productivity both while writing tests and in deployment. …

• I have adopted the same philosophy. A few resources on this, part of the so-called London school TDD: - [LINK] (and the rest of the Wiki) - [LINK] - Most of the screencasts and articles at [LINK] (especially this brilliant talk [LINK] ) - Integration …

• Sure. I'd venture to say that integration tests should be fewer than unit tests, see hexagonal etc. Hopefully those external interfaces are also more stable, so they don't need to be run as often. I tend to use my integration tests also as characterization tests …