> Focus on automation over documentation where appropriate. Tests or other forms of automation are less likely to go out of sync. So instead I try to focus on writing good tests with clear language, so developers working on code I wrote are able to see how the project functions with working code.
This makes me uneasy. I don't want to pick on OP, because its a common enough opinion.
However both is best. I don't think people really read tests to understand code, normally because tests are so contrived and shit they they are a burden to be ignored.
> However both is best. I don't think people really read tests to understand code, normally because tests are so contrived and shit they they are a burden to be ignored.
I have read tests for this kind of reason, but usually in codebases without static types. I consider static types mostly a form of machine-verifiable and tool-friendly documentation.
I mean it should
> Focus on automation over documentation where appropriate. Tests or other forms of automation are less likely to go out of sync. So instead I try to focus on writing good tests with clear language, so developers working on code I wrote are able to see how the project functions with working code.
This makes me uneasy. I don't want to pick on OP, because its a common enough opinion.
However both is best. I don't think people really read tests to understand code, normally because tests are so contrived and shit they they are a burden to be ignored.