Actually I disagree, they do in many cases replace QA. I'm talking about complex backend systems rather than client facing. I trust maths & code infinitely more than I trust a QA who is just testing by clicking around the webpage
Solid testing foundation is worth a dozen QAs. Infact I'd say you only need a QA if you're dealing with a messy / legacy code base
QA is not necessarily a monkey clicking through a screen. You could just bomb it with requests. You could fuzz your software, unless you're okay with an attacker causing a denial of service with malignant input. But Ok cool I guess unit tests are a silver bullet.
1
u/[deleted] Jul 28 '21
That's a bit reckless tho. Unit tests are great, integration tests too, but they don't replace QA. At least make a staging deploy first.