2011/6/22 laurent laffont <[email protected]>

> IMO having the expected value before is the right way ! Do you TDD ? It
> makes a lot of sense for me to write assert: expected equals: actual. Am I
> alone ?
>

I practice TDD, and I start tests with assertions (after naming them). But
I'm not sure I specify expected value first, as I'm focused on the result (I
write the test for). Btw, I use Mocketry and exploit its sugar (or DSL?) for
specifications there. So, I write:

actualValue should equal: expectedValue.


That is, after I've decided on a test case and named it, I think: what
should I test? That's the actualValue. I name and write it. And only after
that, I think about the value it should have… well, in most cases at least.

Anyway, I'm not sure an order I use to write assertion should be repeated by
assertion messages. Just as order I use to write a test (name -> assertion
-> the way to fetch the actual value -> …) is not reflected by test code.
It's much more important to have a readable and understandable (after many
months) code. And for me it's much more natural to read it this way:

self assert: actualValue equals: expectedValue




If you do TDD, you have first to decide what you expect. You don't know how
> to get it because the code doesn't exist yet. So you usually I write
>
> self assert: 'i want this' equals:
>
> then stop because I have to think about the interface / selectors / object
> I want. So it matches the flow of thought when I'm writing tests.
>
> And the other weird thing is that with this "fix" I now have to change
> hundred of tests I've written to be semantically correct !!!!
>
>
> Laurent.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:39 AM, Sean P. DeNigris 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>> Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
>> >
>> > I don't understand Sean's problem.
>> >
>>
>> Still using 1.2.2 :) Thanks for fixing it.
>>
>> Sean
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://forum.world.st/assert-equals-feels-backwards-tp3614760p3615548.html
>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>


-- 
Dennis Schetinin

Reply via email to