偶尔，我自己或我的同事会花几个小时来研究一个不太明显的错误，一旦发现了错误的原因，90%的情况下代码都没有经过单元测试。单元测试并不存在，因为开发人员为了节省时间而偷工减料，但随后却失去了这一点和更多的调试。

花少量的时间来编写单元测试可以节省未来调试的时间。

测试驱动开发中经常被忽略的一个主要部分是可测试代码的编写。乍一看，这似乎是一种妥协，但您会发现可测试代码最终也是模块化的、可维护的和可读的。 如果你仍然需要说服别人，这是一个关于单元测试优点的简单演示。

单元测试的全部意义在于使测试变得简单。这是自动的。“make test”就完成了。如果您面临的问题之一是难以测试代码，那么这就是使用单元测试的最佳理由。

这是非常以. net为中心的，但是有人尝试过Pex吗?

我非常怀疑，直到我尝试了——哇，多么精彩的表演。以前我想“我不会被这个概念说服，直到我明白它实际上对我有什么好处”。我只跑了一次就改变了主意，说:“我不在乎你怎么知道那里有致命异常的风险，但现在我知道我必须处理它”

也许这种行为唯一的缺点是它会标记所有事情，给你六个月的积压。但是，如果你有代码债，你总是有代码债，只是你不知道而已。告诉项目经理可能有20万个故障点，而你之前只知道有几十个，这是一个令人讨厌的前景，这意味着首先解释这个概念是至关重要的。

单元测试很像去健身房。你知道这对你有好处，所有的争论都有意义，所以你开始锻炼。刚开始有一种冲动，这很好，但几天后你开始怀疑是否值得这样做。你每天花一个小时换衣服，在仓鼠转轮上跑步，你不确定除了腿和手臂疼痛之外，你真的得到了什么。

然后，也许一两周后，就在疼痛消失的时候，一个重要的截止日期开始来临。你需要把醒着的每一个小时都用来完成“有用的”工作，所以你要去掉无关紧要的事情，比如去健身房。你改掉了这个习惯，当截止日期结束的时候，你又回到了起点。如果你设法回到健身房，你会觉得和你第一次去的时候一样酸痛。

You do some reading, to see if you're doing something wrong. You begin feel a little bit of irrational spite toward all the fit, happy people extolling the virtues of exercise. You realize that you don't have a lot in common. They don't have to drive 15 minutes out of the way to go to the gym; there is one in their building. They don't have to argue with anybody about the benefits of exercise; it is just something everybody does and accepts as important. When a Big Deadline approaches, they aren't told that exercise is unnecessary any more than your boss would ask you to stop eating.

所以，回答你的问题，单元测试通常是值得付出努力的，但是所需的努力量对每个人来说都不一样。如果你在一家不重视代码质量的公司处理意大利面条式的代码库，那么单元测试可能需要付出巨大的努力。(许多经理会歌颂单元测试，但这并不意味着他们会在关键时刻支持单元测试。)

如果你正试图将单元测试引入到你的工作中，并且没有看到你所期待的所有阳光和彩虹，不要责怪自己。你可能需要找一份新工作来真正让单元测试为你工作。

Yes - Unit Testing is definitely worth the effort but you should know it's not a silver bullet. Unit Testing is work and you will have to work to keep the test updated and relevant as code changes but the value offered is worth the effort you have to put in. The ability to refactor with impunity is a huge benefit as you can always validate functionality by running your tests after any change code. The trick is to not get too hung up on exactly the unit-of-work you're testing or how you are scaffolding test requirements and when a unit-test is really a functional test, etc. People will argue about this stuff for hours on end and the reality is that any testing you do as your write code is better than not doing it. The other axiom is about quality and not quantity - I have seen code-bases with 1000's of test that are essentially meaningless as the rest don't really test anything useful or anything domain specific like business rules, etc of the particular domain. I've also seen codebases with 30% code coverage but the tests were relevant, meaningful and really awesome as they tested the core functionality of the code it was written for and expressed how the code should be used.

在探索新的框架或代码库时，我最喜欢的一个技巧是为“它”编写单元测试，以发现事物是如何工作的。这是一个学习新事物的好方法，而不是阅读枯燥的文档:)