• From: Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@g...>
• To: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@g...>
• Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:45:03 +0100

On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@g...> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@g...> wrote:
>>> I'm completely bemused.
>>
>> So am I :)
>>
>>
>> Yes, the primary purpose of unit tests is to be able to fail. An unit
>> test that always passes is useless.
>>
>

I think some of the bemusement is because the development community
have (mis)appropriated unit testing  as a development methodology (the
mis is my opinion).

The primary purpose of testing (all levels of testing) is risk
mitigation. In that context it is easy to see why a test that fails
when there is no bug is useless.

It isn't mitigating any risk.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Testing XML don't use xUnit
    • From: Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@g...>

• References:
  • Testing XML don't use xUnit
    • From: Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@g...>
  • Re: Testing XML don't use xUnit
    • From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • Re: Testing XML don't use xUnit
    • From: Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@g...>
  • Re: Testing XML don't use xUnit
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • Re: Testing XML don't use xUnit
    • From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@g...>
  • Re: Testing XML don't use xUnit
    • From: Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@g...>