this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
838 points (99.8% liked)
Greentext
6788 readers
1447 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I've never heard TDD described like this. I cannot even understand how this works from a project standpoint.
"We need a new feature. Todd's written the test already, so everyone just have at it with your fastest implementation; whoever passes first, gets to go to prod!"
It's insane, but it almost makes sense. If you have good tests, code that passes them should be a good enough start. Spend good money on devs that can write said tests, and then you can use them to drive productivity evaluation for those who aren't. As a bonus, if you need to "shed" "controllable" expenses, you can fire the cheap devs.
I hate it.
Reminds me of MCMC sampling, or straight up rejection sampling.