On: Ask HN: Are you tired too in this AI era?

[nehal3m]

Well yeah you’re not reviewing the tests so you wouldn’t catch them.

[ffsm8 → nehal3m]

You seem to forget what tests are.

They're representative of scenarios which your application can enter.

So if the tests were mocked and a bug went live he'd still notice, after all it means your software behaved incorrectly and now you gotta clean up the pieces.

[nehal3m → ffsm8]

But the purpose of a test is to catch a bug before it goes live.

[ffsm8 → nehal3m]

This is becoming cyclical, did you forget what this comment chain went about?

The discussion went from tests being written by ai, to nobody actually reviewing the tests, to the claim that given those circumstances, you wouldn't notice that the tests may not tests anything anymore because of mocks.

My statement was merely pointing out that your previous comment was groundless because they still would've found out about those bugs when they went live.

[nehal3m → ffsm8]

>My statement was merely pointing out that your previous comment was groundless because they still would've found out about those bugs when they went live.

Maybe. You're assuming visible and obvious bugs.

[ffsm8 → nehal3m]

The others frequently go into prod with rigorous review too, so that hasn't really changed between pre ai and today from my perspective.

[nehal3m → ffsm8]

Exactly, which shows review and prod both miss things. Mutation testing (Stryker, mutmut, PIT) is how you find out which tests can’t fail.