[Cuis-dev] Enhancement proposal: Fail test when no assertion ran

[Andres Valloud]

If we go by "agreement" of others, well that's the logical fallacy of 
appeal to authority or majority.  Most already think we shouldn't be 
using Smalltalk, too.  There's a lot more to it than that.

The real problems of the world are more related to nobody having the 
time to properly review code because there's too much of it, and the 
fact that nobody needs a professional license to write software.  More 
boilerplate is not going to help, and that has consequences.  For 
example, this

https://www.theregister.com/2024/04/01/xz_backdoor_open_source/

happened by packaging malicious code in tests.

Why can't we agree that our testing framework declares that unhandled 
exceptions are always bad, because they are?  Why should anyone have to 
write code to say that again?

On 4/3/24 10:34 AM, Hernán Wilkinson wrote:
> That is a good point, but there is an "agreement" around the automatic 
> testing people on making explicit that you are not expecting an 
> exception, differentiate that test from the ones that do not have 
> assertions by mistake.
> I do believe it is better to do it that way, it makes explicit what you 
> are expecting and if the framework testing changes (like in this case is 
> suggested), the test will continue working.
> I think that explicit is better than implicit in many areas, programming 
> languages is one of them; python has that as a rule for example.
> I think making explicit that you are not expecting an exception to be 
> signaled is better than not doing it.
> 
> Hernan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 2:22 PM Andres Valloud via Cuis-dev 
> <cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st <mailto:cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st>> wrote:
> 
>     No, you can write code in a test method with the expectation that it
>     will not raise unhandled exceptions, and you do not need assertions for
>     that.  Specifically, you do not need to write the silly
> 
>              shouldnt: [...] raise: UnhandledException
> 
>     because that's what SUnit is there for.  You do not know a priori what
>     the code writer is doing, so the tool should not guess.
> 
>     On 4/3/24 7:42 AM, Juan Vuletich via Cuis-dev wrote:
>      > a test without assertions is not a test.
>     -- 
>     Cuis-dev mailing list
>     Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st <mailto:Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st>
>     https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev
>     <https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> *Hernán Wilkinson
> Agile Software Development, Teaching & Coaching*
> *Phone: +54-011*-4893-2057
> *Twitter: @HernanWilkinson*
> *site: http://www.10Pines.com <http://www.10pines.com/>*
> Address: Alem 896, Floor 6, Buenos Aires, Argentina