91 lines
No EOL
3.6 KiB
JSON
91 lines
No EOL
3.6 KiB
JSON
{
|
|
"uuid": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "cfb22ecc-4401-41bf-8ed5-4a9321601a17"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"langcode": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "en"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"type": [
|
|
{
|
|
"target_id": "daily_email",
|
|
"target_type": "node_type",
|
|
"target_uuid": "8bde1f2f-eef9-4f2d-ae9c-96921f8193d7"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"revision_timestamp": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "2025-05-11T09:00:01+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": "Good software is easy to test"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"created": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "2025-02-03T00:00:00+00:00"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"changed": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "2025-05-11T09:00:01+00:00"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"promote": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": false
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"sticky": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": false
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"default_langcode": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": true
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"revision_translation_affected": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": true
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"path": [
|
|
{
|
|
"alias": "\/daily\/2025\/02\/03\/testable",
|
|
"langcode": "en"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"body": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "\n <p>One piece of criteria for whether some software is good is whether it's easy to write automated tests for.<\/p>\n\n<p>I recently worked on a method that was more than 150 lines.<\/p>\n\n<p>It was difficult to understand, had too many responsibilities and didn't use dependency injection.<\/p>\n\n<p>This made it difficult to test.<\/p>\n\n<p>If it was split into several smaller methods or classes, each could be responsible for different aspects and have clear responsibilities.<\/p>\n\n<p>Each new method or class could have its own tests to verify its own functionality works.<\/p>\n\n<p>It would be easy to understand and identify and fix any issues.<\/p>\n\n<p>If dependency injection was used, things can be mocked or changed as needed to make the logic testable.<\/p>\n\n<p>If everything is in one large function, the code isn't testable.<\/p>\n\n<p>Even if it works now, it will be difficult to change in the future.<\/p>\n\n ",
|
|
"format": "full_html",
|
|
"processed": "\n <p>One piece of criteria for whether some software is good is whether it's easy to write automated tests for.<\/p>\n\n<p>I recently worked on a method that was more than 150 lines.<\/p>\n\n<p>It was difficult to understand, had too many responsibilities and didn't use dependency injection.<\/p>\n\n<p>This made it difficult to test.<\/p>\n\n<p>If it was split into several smaller methods or classes, each could be responsible for different aspects and have clear responsibilities.<\/p>\n\n<p>Each new method or class could have its own tests to verify its own functionality works.<\/p>\n\n<p>It would be easy to understand and identify and fix any issues.<\/p>\n\n<p>If dependency injection was used, things can be mocked or changed as needed to make the logic testable.<\/p>\n\n<p>If everything is in one large function, the code isn't testable.<\/p>\n\n<p>Even if it works now, it will be difficult to change in the future.<\/p>\n\n ",
|
|
"summary": null
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
} |