Why Developers Avoid Writing Tests and the Dangers of Cutting Corners

Considering the importance of software testing in the development process, it’s puzzling why some developers resist writing tests. There are various reasons for this resistance, but the truth is, in the long run, failing to write tests can be costly and dangerous. This article explores the reasons why developers avoid writing tests and the pitfalls of skipping this crucial step.

Assumptions and Blind Spots

When developers write tests, there’s always the risk of oversight, assumptions, and blind spots. It’s far better to have someone else review and write tests for your code. This helps catch issues and ensure comprehensive test coverage. As the acclaimed author Eli Goldratt said, ‘Look at how the system is measured, and I will tell you how the system behaves.’ This statement highlights the importance of understanding the metrics used to evaluate a system. Developers who resist writing tests might do so due to cultural norms, feeling that it’s beneath them. This cultural mindset is becoming less common, but it still exists.

The Value of Quality Assurance

Many developers avoid writing tests because they feel it’s a time-consuming burden. However, this short-term pain often leads to long-term gains. When done correctly, unit tests can significantly improve the quality of the code, making future changes and updates more manageable.

The pressure to maximize velocity and release features quickly can often take precedence over writing tests. Managers often prioritize speed and volume over quality, focusing on metrics such as sprint velocity or the sheer number of features released. However, this approach can be detrimental in the long run. As deadlines become unrealistic, quality is frequently sidelined, leading to higher maintenance costs and more issues down the road.

The Risks of Not Writing Tests

Skipping the test writing process often stems from human nature. People tend to cut corners when they believe the consequences are low. Strict enforcement, such as monitoring test coverage and automatically denying pull requests if coverage drops, can motivate developers to write tests. However, managers often adopt similar shortcuts to save time, money, and resources.

For instance, automation tests can be costly to design and implement. Instead of investing in automation, managers might opt for manual testing, leading to higher maintenance costs and inefficiencies. Additionally, relying heavily on skilled engineers who stay with the project can mitigate some of these risks. However, if these engineers leave, the knowledge and expertise built into the code without tests can be lost, making it difficult for new team members to understand and maintain the codebase.

The Importance of Testing Strategies

There is no one-size-fits-all approach to testing. Test-driven development (TDD) can be highly beneficial when tackling complex algorithms, but it’s not an absolute requirement. Different types of tests, such as unit tests, integration tests, and end-to-end tests (with automated UI testing), each have their strengths and weaknesses. Choosing the right type of test for a particular task is crucial and can help ensure that the codebase is thoroughly tested.

Automated testing is indeed costly in the short term, but the long-term benefits include fewer bugs, easier maintenance, and more reliable software. Missed tests can lead to product defects, customer complaints, and a negative impact on business revenue. Therefore, it’s essential to strike a balance between efficiency and thoroughness, ensuring that the code is adequately tested without overburdening the development team.

In conclusion, while writing tests may seem like a burden at first, it is an investment in the future of the software. By recognizing the potential pitfalls and adopting a balanced approach to testing, developers can ensure that their work is robust, maintainable, and reliable.