What is frustrating is TDD evangelists insisting everyone do purist TDD in their regular development (like the guy being quoted in this article).
You set your standards as a team of what you will consider acceptable tests and as long as the dev submitting the PR meets that standard why does it matter if they did TDD or not? TDD is a means to end, it's not a religion. As long as you write tests that meet the standard it doesn't matter when you write those tests.
The level of micromanaging that TDD evangelists seem to want in people's workflows is infuriating. It's literally cultish.
Edit: I realize this came across more negative and abrasive than I intended. I think TDD has some good parts (primarily around gamification of writing tests and giving a serotonin hit whenever a test goes from red to green). I practice TDD around 50% of the time when appropriate, but most people who have worked in the industry that TDD as sold by purists is impractical and adds negative value.
You set your standards as a team of what you will consider acceptable tests and as long as the dev submitting the PR meets that standard why does it matter if they did TDD or not? TDD is a means to end, it's not a religion. As long as you write tests that meet the standard it doesn't matter when you write those tests.
The level of micromanaging that TDD evangelists seem to want in people's workflows is infuriating. It's literally cultish.
Edit: I realize this came across more negative and abrasive than I intended. I think TDD has some good parts (primarily around gamification of writing tests and giving a serotonin hit whenever a test goes from red to green). I practice TDD around 50% of the time when appropriate, but most people who have worked in the industry that TDD as sold by purists is impractical and adds negative value.