Well, at one point, I realized that tests were saving my butt more often than not.
Especially with Smalltalk. They also do form basic documentation for the lack of anything better. At least, you can debug them to see what happens. Phil On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Paul Davidowitz <[email protected]>wrote: > It seems to me that a big reason for developing via writing tests first > (Test Driven Development) is that the tests serve as a debugging tool -- > if a test breaks, then the last piece of (non-test) code that change is > likely the culprit. But with the powerful debugging environment that > comes with Smalltalk, I am wondering of the utility of TDD (TDD is big > in the Ruby camp perhaps for a reason). After all, writing and > re-writing the tests becomes quite a non-trivial chore (not to mention > that the tests themselves could be buggy). So my question: Is it ok in > Smalltalk to write tests afterwards? Is it even perhaps recommended? > > - Paul > >
