I don't remember exactly where and when, but I think we've discussed the Laser Game tutorial already. I told this before, and I (after reviewing the tutorial again) should repeat it again: actually, this tutorial doesn't show TDD. I can explain my opinion in detail if someone's interested, but in general, that's simply an up-front design approach with some automatic testing. It's not even "Test-First" approach most of time.
Disclaimer: I don't mean the tutorial and/or the design approach used there are bad. I like this tutorial. It's really very good: it shows many aspects for Smalltalk programing, it shows how to use debugger and inspectors properly. I borrowed many ideas from there for my Smalltalk programming course… It's just not TDD, not "pure" TDD at least. -- Best regards, Dennis Schetinin 2013/6/7 <b...@openinworld.com> > Paul Davidowitz 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 >> >> >> >> > Actually some Smalltalk'ers consider the debugger a major facilitator of > TDD by mostly coding from within the debugger. > 1. Before writing any application code, write a test. > 2. Execute that test straight away. Of course it fails because you > haven't written any application code. > 3. Up comes the debugger - now "from within the debugger" add the > application code needed to satisfy the test. > 4. Repeat. > > A good demonstration of this is Stephan Wessels' Laser Game tutorial [1] > (but you'll temporarily need to revert to Squeak 3.9 to do it) > cheers -ben > > >
