Skip to content

Comment on 3 percent of Python codebases we checked had silently failing unit testsparent

Comments

Agreed in perfect world, but unfortunately any process that involves humans will involve human error.

We do code review because we expect human error when the code was written by a human, but then we also expect not human error when the code is being read (reviewed) by a human? Any process that expects zero human error will always fail.

That's where linters add value: they allow devs to do what humans are good at (the creative complex and interesting stuff) while the bots do what bots are good at (the boring repetitive stuff)

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.