Unit tests are exactly for code that is often rewritten, because it ensures that whatever interface still behaves the same, regardless of the implementation. This a large portion of the point of unit tests: not for testing the initial implementation but confirming that any subsequent implementation behaves the same.
In a normal scenario yes, but “vibe coding” rewrites whole swaths of code. It’s like painting detail with a bucket. Trying to keep up with it seems like a sisyphiean task
Using AI to write Unit tests is one of the few use cases I somewhat understand, but even that turns out horrible with improper supervision. I reviewed one Pull Request once where the testing was so horribly cobbled together and nonsensical that I rewrote those tests by hand (after asking the person I was reviewing to fix it twice and them only making it worse by letting their AI rewrite them)
I bet you their “10x coder” can’t describe what a unit test is nor its purpose
Then again, can you even unit test AI generated slop with how often it’s rewritten?
Unit tests are exactly for code that is often rewritten, because it ensures that whatever interface still behaves the same, regardless of the implementation. This a large portion of the point of unit tests: not for testing the initial implementation but confirming that any subsequent implementation behaves the same.
In a normal scenario yes, but “vibe coding” rewrites whole swaths of code. It’s like painting detail with a bucket. Trying to keep up with it seems like a sisyphiean task
Using AI to write Unit tests is one of the few use cases I somewhat understand, but even that turns out horrible with improper supervision. I reviewed one Pull Request once where the testing was so horribly cobbled together and nonsensical that I rewrote those tests by hand (after asking the person I was reviewing to fix it twice and them only making it worse by letting their AI rewrite them)