Interesting reading as usual !
At peace again
However I think the follow blog post put my mind at ease again. I now think I understand where all the confusion comes from.
https://medium.com/onfido-tech/the-not-so-magic-tricks-of-testing-in-elixir-1-2-89bfcf252321
Which team do you belong to?
Detroit-school TDD is the classical one, created by Kent Beck and others in the 90s. This type of TDD tries to maximize the regression safety net introduced by tests, and does that by minimizing the use of test doubles. However, this will inevitably lead to redundant coverage (and all the problems that come with it). Also, the design feedback is weaker when practicing this type of TDD.
In the London-school TDD, we isolate all the dependencies and focus only on the subject under test. For this reason, followers of this school usually think that these are the TRUE unit tests, since you’re only exercising the code that’s under test. This type of TDD usually yields a higher design feedback, but they have to be complemented with integration tests, to ensure everything is glued together as it should.
Turns out I have been practicing London style TDD instead of Detroit style TDD. I have been advocating for a London style TDD form the start without knowing. Now all makes sense.
Is Detroit style TDD bad?
I don’t know. I am not well informed enough to make an opinion, but perhaps some of you can share your opinion?
Share articles and conferences about it for your fellow programmers!
