from Hacker News

Ask HN: doesn't runtime exceptions and unit tests share the same goal?

by highCs on 6/16/16, 9:53 PM with 5 comments

I still see many programmers guarding runtime errors using "ifs". Which is ridiculous and leads to programs very hard to debug. Which then kind-of leads to the use (and importance) of unit tests. Any thought on that?

  • by viraptor on 6/16/16, 10:18 PM

    > Which is ridiculous and leads to programs very hard to debug

    What's the alternative in your opinion? Let's say you're trying to open a file. It can fail. You've got to check this.

  • by gt2 on 6/17/16, 5:36 PM

    Couldn't the ifs have other purpose, such as branching to perform other operations in those cases?

    Also, consider that if the entire block isn't wrapped in a try/catch, those ifs are guarding against runtime errors which would crash the program for the user.

    Although I do see unit tests making use of exceptions in their decision to pass/fail, it's not the only way to write a unit test-- sometimes you test for value, etc.

  • by bbcbasic on 6/19/16, 10:10 AM

    Can you give an example and how you'd re factor it. I'm having a hard time visualising what you mean.

    I have seen code that catches any exception and returns false. That is annoying although for different reasons.

  • by GFK_of_xmaspast on 6/16/16, 10:11 PM

    How does the existence of a unit test suite, no matter how good, preclude against a runtime error?

  • by liveoneggs on 6/17/16, 12:55 AM

    You sound like a great candidate for Erlang!