On 04/05/2010, at 10:31 PM, Ben Schwarz wrote:
Cliff, Robert lives in Tokyo but just loves us too damn much to not
get involved.
It'll certainly be fun to open up the debate on the ML after
the night... but last time we started talking about possible
subjects, each one spawned a debate that lasted until the
yawn factor kicked in ;-).
Potential participants can always ask for *private* comment
beforehand from folk who won't attend on the night...
Clifford Heath.
On May 4, 10:17 pm, Clifford Heath <[email protected]> wrote:
Robert,
Thanks for your thoughts... but...
Can I ask that we please leave the debate until the night?
It seems kinda pointless to have a great debate on a subject
we've become tired of, and where everyone already knows
what everyone else thinks...
Clifford Heath.
On 04/05/2010, at 10:10 PM, Robert Gravina wrote:
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Gareth Townsend
<[email protected]
wrote:
For a less Ranty topic maybe something along the lines of:
"Testing is the hardest part of development"
Actually this I tend to agree with this, but not so much because
it's
hard but because it's hard to do it well. Here's the most common
objection I get to writing tests:
"So I wrote the code in 15 mins and tried it out and it works but
now
I have to spend 30 mins writing tests... what was the point of all
this again?"
OK, most of you are probably throwing things at your screens right
now
but I've heard that before and experienced the fustration when I was
very new to rspec et al. Yes, when you test first and you're
fluent in
rspec and your chosen mocking framework you can write the tests and
the code in 20 mins flat, but until you get there... there's not as
much of a (buzzword alert) ROI on automated tests (sorry!). So,
how do
you get yourself/your teammates to perservere with the learning
curve
until you reach that zen/enlightenment stage of testing? We all know
it's worth it, and sure there's the "you must eat your all your
vegetables before you can have any desert" approach (i.e. complain
loudly on the bugtracker), but unless you get (another buzzword)
buy-in from teammates/management it doesn't work so well..
I think I'm rambling now but I think (at least for me) what makes
testing hard is not testing itself, it's testing *productively* and
*getting new-to-testing developers who don't know (beyond the
testing
mantra) why they should bother to test* which is most difficult.
Anyway, I can't actually attend any roro meetings/debates so feel
free
to ignore me :) Also, compared to this audience I'm a relatively
young
pup in the ruby world, so please feel free to turn your nose up at
my
naive ramblings... but I felt like adding my 2c.
Robert
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
.
For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
.
For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or
Rails Oceania" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
