The author does not seem to have to support any professional / paying users, and wants freedom to experiment more than a guarantee of a known working version. The author also does not seem to work on large systems, or do significant teamwork (that is, not being the only principal author).
In such a situation, all these tools may not provide a lot of value. A flute player in a large orchestra playing a complex symphony needs notes and/or a conductor; a flute player playing solo against a drum machine, or, playing free jazz, does not much need notes, and would likely be even hindered by them.
Tests and version control still have immense value when working solo.
Tests help with ensuring that you don't introduce regressions, and that you can safely refactor. It's likely that you test changes manually anyway, so having automated tests simply formalizes this, and saves you time and effort in the long run.
Version control helps you see why a change was done, and the ability to revert changes, over longer periods of time. We tend to forget this even after a few weeks, so having a clean version control history is also helpful for the future version of you.
Not having the discipline to maintain both, and choosing to ignore them completely, is just insane to me. But, hey, whatever works for OP. I just wouldn't expect anyone else to want to work with them.
The only scenario where I could conceive not using either is in very small projects with a short lifespan: throwaway scripts, and the like. The author is writing their own language and virtual machine, which don't really align with this. Knowing their philosophy, I would hesitate to use anything they made, let alone contribute to it.
Whatever floats your boat, but just to be clear my own language and virtual machine do have tests. The value of tests depends on the domain. Graphics and games benefit less from tests. My graphical text editor straddles the worlds.
I'm still using version control as I've clarified elsewhere. I wasn't expecting this post to gain such a broad audience; I realize now it is really about how one's workflows can keep one stuck in a rut, a local optimum.
Thanks for clarifying. I think you might want to make this clearer in the blog post, since many people had the wrong impression.
> The value of tests depends on the domain.
I agree with this. And like I said, for small throwaway projects and quick experiments I can see how tests and version control can be tedious to deal with. But even in projects like your Freewheeling Apps, where you're releasing them to the public and encourage people to use, you're doing them and yourself a disservice to not have tests.
But you clearly know what you're doing, so I'll stop preaching. :) Good luck with your projects!
BTW, I'm a big fan of LÖVE and it's super interesting what you're using it for. I only imagined it was good for games, not apps.
Thanks! I should add that almost every app you can get to from https://git.sr.ht/~akkartik/lines.love by traversing the "Mirrors and forks" sections of readmes has these thorough tests for the editor widget. Certainly every app you can see in the family tree image map from 2023 does: https://akkartik.name/freewheeling/#resources. It's only a tiny new sub-tree that currently does not:
In such a situation, all these tools may not provide a lot of value. A flute player in a large orchestra playing a complex symphony needs notes and/or a conductor; a flute player playing solo against a drum machine, or, playing free jazz, does not much need notes, and would likely be even hindered by them.