[tele_ski]

I do appreciate that you write tests. I find it's like pulling teeth with most devs to get them to write anything but the most basic of tests.

I tend to think more than write code, so usually my first go is reasonably close to what I need. But there are always edge cases you just never think about. I'd rather have a strong debugger than a repl imo

[pdimitar]

> I find it's like pulling teeth with most devs to get them to write anything but the most basic of tests

You are unfortunately very correct (at least in my 21 years of experience as well). I too feel annoyance when I know that I made a piece of code work well but (a) every now and then I am truly wrong and (b) various pieces of the system in the code interact in sometimes unexpected ways, unveiling inputs to your code that you haven't foreseen.

So even though it often takes a heavy and annoyed sigh out of me, I still roll up my sleeves and add the tests because I've shot myself in the foot too many times, and ignoring past experience is just being a stupido.

As for debugger/REPL, they are not orthogonal; you can have both. I'd more contrast debugger with tests themselves -- both are ways to go step by step through a process that you know is faulty somewhere.

REPL to me is just a way to more quickly sketch a v1.0 of a piece of code, nothing else.