68 lines
2.7 KiB
YAML
68 lines
2.7 KiB
YAML
uuid:
|
|
- value: ffa93a1b-f239-4c0a-9f34-50cd6532f353
|
|
langcode:
|
|
- value: en
|
|
type:
|
|
- target_id: daily_email
|
|
target_type: node_type
|
|
target_uuid: 8bde1f2f-eef9-4f2d-ae9c-96921f8193d7
|
|
revision_timestamp:
|
|
- value: '2025-05-11T09:00:20+00:00'
|
|
revision_uid:
|
|
- target_type: user
|
|
target_uuid: b8966985-d4b2-42a7-a319-2e94ccfbb849
|
|
revision_log: { }
|
|
status:
|
|
- value: true
|
|
uid:
|
|
- target_type: user
|
|
target_uuid: b8966985-d4b2-42a7-a319-2e94ccfbb849
|
|
title:
|
|
- value: 'Automated tests mean you can make changes quicker'
|
|
created:
|
|
- value: '2024-01-31T00:00:00+00:00'
|
|
changed:
|
|
- value: '2025-05-11T09:00:20+00:00'
|
|
promote:
|
|
- value: false
|
|
sticky:
|
|
- value: false
|
|
default_langcode:
|
|
- value: true
|
|
revision_translation_affected:
|
|
- value: true
|
|
path:
|
|
- alias: /daily/2024/01/31/automated-tests-mean-you-can-make-changes-quicker
|
|
langcode: en
|
|
body:
|
|
- value: |
|
|
<p>Before fixing <a href="/daily/2024/01/30/tdd-doesnt-mean-you-know-everything-upfront">yesterday's bug</a>, because I'd written automated tests, I ran them to ensure they were all passing.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Then, I was able to focus solely on adding the new use case - starting with a failing test to replicate the issue and then getting it to pass.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Because it was already tested, I didn't need to worry about breaking any other functionality and introducing regressions.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>When the new test was passing, I could run the whole test suite and ensure they still passed and things continued to work.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Without the tests, I'd either need to check everything else manually (which takes time) or worry that something could potentially be broken.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Having tests meant I could be confident that the new and existing functionality worked.</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
format: full_html
|
|
processed: |
|
|
<p>Before fixing <a href="/daily/2024/01/30/tdd-doesnt-mean-you-know-everything-upfront">yesterday's bug</a>, because I'd written automated tests, I ran them to ensure they were all passing.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Then, I was able to focus solely on adding the new use case - starting with a failing test to replicate the issue and then getting it to pass.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Because it was already tested, I didn't need to worry about breaking any other functionality and introducing regressions.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>When the new test was passing, I could run the whole test suite and ensure they still passed and things continued to work.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Without the tests, I'd either need to check everything else manually (which takes time) or worry that something could potentially be broken.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Having tests meant I could be confident that the new and existing functionality worked.</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
summary: null
|
|
field_daily_email_cta: { }
|