I'm fairly new to programming and want to learn how professional software is developed without tying the answer to a particular language or technology stack. I understand that mature projects usually have automated checks to catch regressions when new code is added, but I'm unsure when those checks should be introduced and how the project should be organized to support them.
For example, I have a small C game-engine project that started as a way to learn raycasting. It currently works, but if I were going to build a complete game on top of it, should I first focus on getting the game functional and add tests and CI/CD later, or develop those things in parallel? How should I separate the code so it remains testable? Should I test nearly every part of the game, including rendering, or concentrate on certain types of logic?
I'm also planning a blog project that I expect to maintain long term, so I'd like to approach it professionally from the beginning without overengineering it.
3 Answers
For a game, it’s common to get a small playable version working first and then improve the architecture as you learn what the project actually needs. Add basic automated builds and a few high-value tests early, especially for code that has already become important, but don’t design an entire enterprise pipeline before you have a real product. As the project stabilizes, add unit tests for core rules, integration tests for major systems, and scripted scenarios or performance benchmarks for gameplay and engine behavior.
Testing is useful, but it’s a tradeoff rather than a requirement for every line of code. Focus on testing stable interfaces and important behavior instead of implementation details. Pure game rules, data transformations, parsers, and other deterministic logic are usually easy to test. Rendering and rapidly changing prototypes are often better covered with a few integration, scenario, or visual checks. Keep the boundaries between systems clear, since those are the parts you’ll want to rely on as the internals evolve.
Start by understanding who the software is for and what problem or experience it needs to deliver. That helps you decide which parts deserve the most engineering effort. A hobby project can begin simply: keep modules reasonably separated, use version control, make the project build automatically, and add tests around logic that would be expensive or embarrassing to break. Avoid testing every private function just for coverage, because tests also require maintenance and can become an obstacle when the design is still changing.
It’s easy to overthink architecture at the beginning. Build a small vertical slice, learn what shape the project is taking, and refactor when real requirements justify it. Just avoid letting temporary prototype code spread everywhere without boundaries.
That makes sense. I was worried that postponing tests would make the code impossible to maintain, but starting with a few important checks sounds more practical.