(Another topic I can't miss:) That's I've tried to explain during ESUG 2011: classic + mockist TDD (which is very similar if not identical to BDD) provides a lot of benefits including solid process, flexible design… and free documentation of course. "Seamless" TDD is really cheap and very efficient in Smalltalk (compared to other development environments, like Java/C# at least), but it still has zero adoption in Smalltalk community, unfortunately.
-- Best regards, Dennis Schetinin 2014-06-21 2:09 GMT+04:00 Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com>: > kilon alios wrote > > Pharo has zero official reference documentation > > Well Pharo By Example and Deep into Pharo are close. IMHO, we've chosen to > pour as many of our limited resources as possible into shrinking and > redesigning the system into something one person can master, rather than > thoroughly document things that may soon change drastically or disappear. > Real BDD (Behavior Driven Design i.e. tests from the perspective of the > user > of the library) would help here as the tests would provide documentation > for > free. But BDD doesn't seem to have caught on in the Smalltalk world, and I > find many (most?) tests to be useless from a "how does this library work" > perspective. Also, when the system stabilizes and we start documentation > "for real", the fun part will be active essays; traditional paper-like > documentation is the kind of thing Smalltalk was invented to replace. > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Where-is-the-postcard-with-syntax-tp4763281p4764026.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > >
