@toiletpaper @lanodan @NonPlayableClown

> So developers were forced to do it right or not at all.

Developers were forced to do it right or just write "Transitional" in the doctype. The reason XHTML failed was that, while the option to do the sloppy version existed, you could do the sloppy version. HTML5 was an unambiguous improvement. The web is a mess and this is something we will all have to live with forever.

> If other languages had have adopted that universally, it would have made test driven dev a lot less pain in the ass imo.

I have seen TDD chase its own tail until you have to fill out fifteen forms and photocopy your birth certificate just to do the equivalent of `assert(n > 0, "n should not ever be zero here.")` and I personally want to fight anyone that ever touched the rspec code. Wherever I possibly can, I just bounce it through the API: way easier to get full coverage, way easier to reproduce failures and stop regressions, way easier to see the point of a test case so nobody ends up maintaining a test for a function deep in the bowels that is actually dead code. If the API can't trigger the code then the code should probably be removed.

Most TDD exists so that individual cogs at the feature factory can be fired. You see it as a bureaucratic requirement and people churning out nonsense test cases that don't actually test anything, you very rarely see it used as a way to make sure that an API is designed sensibly.