ring:test-driven-development

When to use

• Starting implementation of new feature
• Starting implementation of bugfix
• Writing new production code

Skip when

• Reviewing/modifying existing tests
• Exploratory/spike work — TDD is for known requirements, not exploration.

Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.

Core principle: If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.

The Iron Law

NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST

RED → GREEN → REFACTOR

RED: Write Failing Test

Write one minimal test showing what should happen. Name describes behavior. Tests real code (not mocks unless unavoidable).

Time limit: <5 minutes. Complex setup = design too complex.

# Run test — MANDATORY. Never skip.
npm test path/to/test.test.ts   # or go test ./... | pytest

Paste the actual failure output. No output = violation.

| Test Type | Expected Failure | |-----------|-----------------| | New feature | NameError: function not defined or AttributeError | | Bug fix | Actual wrong output/behavior |

Test passes immediately? You're testing existing behavior — fix the test.

GREEN: Minimal Code

Write simplest code to pass the test. Nothing more. No extra features, no refactoring unrelated code.

Run test → confirm passes → confirm other tests still pass.

REFACTOR: Clean Up

After green only. Remove duplication, improve names. Keep tests green. Don't add behavior.

Repeat

Next failing test for next feature.

Violation: Code Written Before Test

Only one action: DELETE IT. Immediately.

rm <files>                                  # remove new files
git restore --staged --worktree <files>     # discard changes to tracked files
# Destructive operations (e.g., git reset --hard) require user confirmation.

Delete means gone forever. These are NOT deleting: git stash, mv to .bak, commenting out, keeping as "reference."

No asking permission. No alternatives. No exceptions.

• Deadline? Delete, communicate delay, do it right.
• 4 hours of work? Sunk cost fallacy. Delete.
• Manager pressure? Delete, explain TDD prevents bugs.

Then start over with TDD.

Good Test Qualities

| Quality | Good | Bad | |---------|------|-----| | Minimal | One thing ("and" in name = split) | test('validates email and domain and whitespace') | | Clear | Describes behavior | test('test1') | | Fails correctly | Expected failure matches missing feature | Test errors out from typo |

Verification Checklist

Before marking work complete:

• [ ] Every new function/method has a test
• [ ] Watched each test fail before implementing
• [ ] Each test failed for expected reason (feature missing, not typo)
• [ ] Wrote minimal code to pass each test
• [ ] All tests pass, output pristine
• [ ] Edge cases and errors covered

When Stuck

| Problem | Solution | |---------|----------| | Don't know how to test | Write wished-for API first, then assertion | | Test too complicated | Design too complicated — simplify interface | | Must mock everything | Code too coupled — use dependency injection | | Test setup huge | Extract helpers; still complex = simplify design |

Bug Fix TDD

Write failing test reproducing the bug. Follow TDD cycle. Never fix bugs without a test.

<example> Bug: empty email accepted RED: `test('rejects empty email')` → FAIL: `expected 'Email required', got undefined` GREEN: `if (!data.email?.trim()) return { error: 'Email required' }` VERIFY: PASS </example>