Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • To be more defensive about input from the server is actually a good idea. That would probably make debugging and fixing bugs easier. I am not sure whether unit tests are really "worth the effort" as I cannot remember any bug that someone reported that would have been found by unit test. We would need good integration tests, but it is so hard to build up and tear down a test system for every run of integration tests. Commented Jul 15 at 15:24
  • "Gracefully recover" seems to be a bad expression here. I assume the goal is to fail as loud as possible, so "grace" is not how I would describe it. Commented Jul 15 at 16:41
  • 1
    @Basilevs No, I mean gracefully recover. It does depend on the script. If the script runs once, top-to-bottom, then maybe fail loud is good. But if it's supposed to be a batch operation, then, in my experience, you often want to proceed past the invalid data. Having observability into the execution can help you figure out the inputs that couldn't be handled. Commented Jul 15 at 16:43