Re: Hooks
Richard <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.devel.sweng |
|---|---|
| Organization | multi-cellular, biological |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
In article <D7F4D9E414140644BF099886C28C6636299D42B774@bngexchange01.bungie.bng.local>,
Mat Noguchi <[email protected]> writes:
> [...] We are talking about how our past experiences working with aging
> codebases have lead us to greater understanding about how to write code
> that we can actually leverage without having to break it apart as much.
I find one of the difficulties of working with aging codebases is that
they typically have no unit test suite around them. So making changes
is hella dangerous. If I had good test coverage, I might be
encouraged to make the changes I need now, knowing I didn't break
things six ways from Sunday.
Is that consistent with your experience? Did your aging codebases
have any unit test coverage to give you confidence in change? Or was
change too risky?
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
_______________________________________________
Sweng-Gamedev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com