testdrivendevelopment at Yahoo! Groups

Re: Digest Number 2914

Nat Pryce — Wed, 14 May 2008 21:32:12 GMT

... Thanks. I know it. Another tool in the same vein is QuickCheck (http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~rjmh/QuickCheck/). Haskell's semantics and decent type system

Re: Digest Number 2914

Kelly Anderson — Wed, 14 May 2008 15:35:14 GMT

... Nat, I think you might be interested in the work being done on Theory based testing with regards to this. Theory explorers are particularly interesting in

Re: Digest Number 2914

Kelly Anderson — Wed, 14 May 2008 15:27:11 GMT

... unix documentation... that is, it executes as programmed.. :-) Or, "the code is the documentation." -Kelly

Re: Digest Number 2914

heusserm — Wed, 14 May 2008 12:04:48 GMT

... This is pretty close to equivalence class partitioning, which is one of the top tools in my arsenal to take the infinite possible number of tests and

Re: Test quality management in TDD

heusserm — Wed, 14 May 2008 12:02:47 GMT

... If you replace "it does the job" with "it may do the job" - it other words, it may satisfice - or even - it's far better than nothing - George, I think we

Re: Digest Number 2914

Nat Pryce — Tue, 13 May 2008 23:00:27 GMT

... Looks rather similar to our JUnit tests, except we don't stub anything out. We use stubs and mocks in unit tests, but not for acceptance tests. We don't

Re: Digest Number 2914

michaelgburton — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:27:15 GMT

... In my working life, they tend to act more like warning signs that somebody doesn't want to figure out the specific cases where a rule applies. mgb

Re: TDD and Round Trip Engineering

Björn Gustafsson — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:09:14 GMT

I have used MagicDraw and other similar tools to do one half of "round-trip": to generate UML-style models from code. They work pretty well for this, though

Re: Digest Number 2914

Donaldson, John (GEO) — Tue, 13 May 2008 12:58:28 GMT

Very nice Avi. John D.

Re: Digest Number 2914

Avi Naparstek — Tue, 13 May 2008 12:09:07 GMT

... I found the following technique useful in bridging the gap between the general requirement and the need to write concrete tests: In a nutshell: Identify

Re: Test quality management in TDD

Ron Jeffries — Tue, 13 May 2008 11:59:57 GMT

... Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com The opinions expressed here /are/ necessarily those of XProgramming.com. But I might change my mind.

Re: Test quality management in TDD

George Dinwiddie — Tue, 13 May 2008 11:14:36 GMT

... Oh, I guess I should have made it clear. I think a suite of executable requirement illustrations are the best tool I know for getting software right. But

Re: Digest Number 2914

Ron Jeffries — Tue, 13 May 2008 10:57:11 GMT

... Well, we definitely agree down to the penultimate paragraph above, but my point was slightly different from the last. If we take "spec" to be this thing

Re: TDD and Round Trip Engineering

Donaldson, John (GEO) — Tue, 13 May 2008 08:24:43 GMT

Cory, I've done this (not really what you ask, but related): sketch some high-level models in UML; pick on a functional piece; implement 'enough' using TDD;

Re: Digest Number 2914

Nat Pryce — Tue, 13 May 2008 06:35:57 GMT

... The latter. ... That's what I was trying to say! For example... A customer might ask for something like "our position in a loan must be included in the