Exactly this. It is kind of always a little bit greasy, a little bit crispy burnt crumbs inside. Really fatty foods like sausages, you dump the waste oil after taking the food out, and rinse it a bit. It’s hard to describe without sounding gross, but strangely seems not that gross when you have one.
No need to pretend it’s healthier. Some things will be, some things won’t be. Definitely doesn’t take 3x in a home setting. If anything 3x faster start to finish in my experience.
Air fryer isn’t the best choice for Chicken breasts, so your point is valid for that cut. It will of course still cook ok. But chicken thighs on the other hand, probably better than a frying pan as you can get the crispyness all over and juicy still in the middle, just like deep frying. The fattier the raw product, the more the cooking choice swings to the air fryer.
For example, George Foreman decommissioned. Sausages never cooked any other way. Chicken nuggets, love them or hate them they cook great in the air fryer. Main convection oven only really used in our house to bake bread.
Haha. Funny, but doesn’t match widespread opinion. Personally it is the best money I have ever spent in my kitchen. Fantastic results. Food often even better than fried, oven baked, pan fried or grilled. I explicitly choose my air fryer for certain cooking even though all those other options available to me. So the opposite of substandard to be honest… there must be a word for that?
And then you try it, still confused how this can fry. And after the first couple of cooks, you don’t care anymore and wouldn’t give up this gadget!
For me the USP is the slide in and out basket, ability to do a little shake. The convenience of that over a tray in the oven and the washing up and the turning and the burning one side of the items… is priceless
Are you sure? Feels like totally less oil than deep fried to me, even tossed in oil, it isn’t sitting in that oil… put too much and that all drips off into the bottom of the pan the basket sits over. I agree to makes fantastic chips (UK), even with oven chips without adding further oil, much better than those oven chips when cooked in an oven.
Caveat - because you bake the QA in. The code itself is already quality assured. Then QA resources can do exploratory testing which does carry a separate value.
Interesting thought, but every evangelist of TDD that I’ve met has nothing to gain other than wanting the code in production to be cheaper to write, more maintainable, proven to work, faster to market, the list goes on. They often care more about the business and the costs involved in software development and are usually pretty selfless.
Since you don’t know how to solve it, you first write a test that goes vaguely in the direction.
If you can’t do that yet, you spike, mess around with it, get your bearings and some insight into where you want to go, try a few things out. Then, trash that and then write the first test as above.
It almost always works, and excels somewhat in legacy code vs just changing things.
It isn’t about ‘might work’. The TDD paradigm isn’t about finding shiny places where you can use. It is just a nice way of writing clean maintainable software in almost all areas.
Places where TDD won’t work are usually by exception rather than the norm.
Often those exceptions are where something already exists and wasn’t put in by TDD because by the definition of TDD you wouldn’t have been able to write that in the first place.
Is it possible that it was those tests and code in the TDD cycle that helped you realise you’d gone down the wrong path?
And if not, perhaps there was a preconceived idea of the code block and what it was going to do, rather than specifying the behaviour wanted via the RGR cycle. With a preconceived idea, with or without the tests, if that idea is wrong, you’ll hit the dead end and have to back track. Fortunately I find that even though I do sometimes find myself in this situation, quite often those tests can be repurposed fairly quickly rather than being chucked away, after all the tests are still software, and not hardware.