> DI is the biggest snake oil out there. The vast majority of time it's just used as a hack job to enable test isolation in weak languages and gives you no real-world decoupling.
Have you got any data or writings to back this up? I ask because what you write is my gut feeling but I can't put it into words or convince anyone.
That I have ended up programming in an area where the answer to testing is "spin that into its own class so it's testable" when the code is used in a single place, would be fine as a private or protected method, but still needs tests to confirm the output is right, drives me crazy. For libraries sure, but for checking the date parsing is right, that you didn't mess up the calculation... just let me test the damn protected method and be done with it.
Hundreds of tiny classes benefits no one, only the testing framework.
Have you got any data or writings to back this up? I ask because what you write is my gut feeling but I can't put it into words or convince anyone.
That I have ended up programming in an area where the answer to testing is "spin that into its own class so it's testable" when the code is used in a single place, would be fine as a private or protected method, but still needs tests to confirm the output is right, drives me crazy. For libraries sure, but for checking the date parsing is right, that you didn't mess up the calculation... just let me test the damn protected method and be done with it.
Hundreds of tiny classes benefits no one, only the testing framework.