Reiterating the same argument in screaming case doesn't bolster your argument. It feels like the internet equivalent of a real life debate where a debater thinks saying the same thing LOUDER makes a better argument.
> - You write one test
Easier said than done. Say your task is to create a low level audio mixer which is something you've never done before. Where do you even begin? That's the hard part.
Some other commenters here have pointed out that exploratory code is different from TDD code, which is a much better argument then what you made here imo.
> I don't want this to come off the wrong way but what you're describing shows you are severely misinformed about what TDD actually is or you're just making assumptions about something based on its name and nothing else.
Instead of questioning the OP's qualifications, perhaps you should hold a slightly less dogmatic opinion. Perhaps OP is familiar with this style of development, and they've run into problem firsthand when they've tried to write tests for an unknown problem domain.
> Some other commenters here have pointed out that exploratory code is different from TDD code, which is a much better argument then what you made here imo.
I find that iterating on tests in exploratory code makes for an excellent driver to exercise the exploration. I don’t see the conflict between the two, except I am not writing test cases to show correctness, I am writing them to learn. To play with the inputs and outputs quickly.
I don't think GP was questioning their qualifications. Its exceedingly clear from OPs remarks they don't know what TDD is and haven't even read the article because it covers all this. In detail.
> - You write one test
Easier said than done. Say your task is to create a low level audio mixer which is something you've never done before. Where do you even begin? That's the hard part.
Some other commenters here have pointed out that exploratory code is different from TDD code, which is a much better argument then what you made here imo.
> I don't want this to come off the wrong way but what you're describing shows you are severely misinformed about what TDD actually is or you're just making assumptions about something based on its name and nothing else.
Instead of questioning the OP's qualifications, perhaps you should hold a slightly less dogmatic opinion. Perhaps OP is familiar with this style of development, and they've run into problem firsthand when they've tried to write tests for an unknown problem domain.