[oselhn]

I prefer to fix bugs before they hit production. It is almost impossible to do that without tests. Also testable code is usually much more readable than untestable god objects, tightly coupled modules and spagetti code.

[odshoifsdhfs]

without tests doesn't mean bad architecture.

I can go the other way and say that code that ends up being 'modified' to be testable, with 43 mocks to just be able to setup a class is as much crap as code without tests.

I would say I never achieved more than 20% or so of test coverage in my products and production code. It doesn't mean it is a mess of tightly coupled modules in any way.

But TDD and any other dogmas in development are like this. Solution A prevents (maybe) a problem, thus if you aren't using it all other code has that problem and defendants will just keep trying to make it so.

[nostrebored]

If you need 43 mocks to unit test a class, your TDD has already found a bad smell. Why are there so many classes tied to a single component?