On 4/2/15 2:46 PM, Wyatt wrote:
On Thursday, 2 April 2015 at 20:55:04 UTC, David Gileadi wrote:
Having never used Cucumber but having been interested in it, what was
the unpleasantness?
Dealing with it at work, I find it puts us scarily at the mercy of
regexen in Ruby, which is unsettling to say the least. More pressingly,
the "plain English" method of writing tests hinders my ability to figure
out what the test is actually trying to do. There's not enough structure
to give you good visual anchors that are easy to follow, so I end up
having to build a mental model of an entire feature file every time I
look at it. It's hugely inconvenient. And if I can't remember what a
phrase corresponds to, I have to hunt down the implementation and read
that anyway, so it's not saving any time or making life any easier.
-Wyatt
On 4/2/15 2:32 PM, Dicebot wrote:
> The very fact of being forced to install some external application)
> which is not even available in my distro repositories) to run set of
> basic tests that could be done with 10 line D or shell script instead.
>
> It is hardly surprising that so far I preferred to submit pull requests
> without testing instead.
Thanks to you both for the answers!
