TDD is just really efficient at demonstrating your inadequacy at achieving this goal. It's a really uncomfortable experience, and to get comfortable with that feeling takes a certain acceptance of the human condition that reads like something straight out of eastern philosophy.
Tl;dr to err is human. To really fuck up requires the aid of a machine.
A good point. I think the bigger learning exercise for this team in particular would be: do we need this test and why? To make them examine a bit more about what they are trying to achieve and not just succumb to testing by numbers.
Ultimately, the large battery of tests passes, but when the system is still borked, the disconnect is great.
Can you make the code say what you mean?
TDD is just really efficient at demonstrating your inadequacy at achieving this goal. It's a really uncomfortable experience, and to get comfortable with that feeling takes a certain acceptance of the human condition that reads like something straight out of eastern philosophy.
Tl;dr to err is human. To really fuck up requires the aid of a machine.