Belated response :-)

Obviously, in TDD, you cannot predict internal algorithmic branches and range conditions and so you cannot write tests that will necessarily exercise all internal branches and boundary conditions.

I know my branch and statement coverage stats have been much improved since I started doing TDD. Since you should only be writing code that is motivated by a failing test you are, from a certain point of view, predicting what the code should do when you write the test.

Does this always result in 100% branch coverage? No, of course not. However lack of 100% branch coverage doesn't always indicate a bug either.

To put it another way, for any reasonably non-trivial routine that you have what you think is a sufficient set of unit tests for, someone could reimplement that routine in such a way that your current test suite still passes but fails to exercise all branches of the code.

This is of course true. However if you start doing arbitrary rewrites of code aimed at breaking the test suite you're no longer doing TDD :-)

You're right that doing TDD doesn't produce a test suite that guarantees that arbitrary code meets the requirements. That's not what TDD aims to do. TDD is a design process, not a testing process. The aim of TDD is to produce working code that meets the requirements, not a test suite that exercises arbitrary code.

This doesn't mean that I think more traditional white box testing, branch coverage, statement coverage, etc. are useless - far from it. They're excellent tools and you can find many bugs with them.

However, with a team doing good TDD I find you'll often get more bang for your buck by spending time on acceptance tests and exploratory testing. As ever YMMV.

In reply to Re^5: Automatic generation of tests by adrianh
in thread Automatic generation of tests by DrHyde

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.