On Feb 4, 2008 7:51 AM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 4, 2008 1:20 AM, Pat Maddox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For some info on why BDD kicks TDD's butt ... > > Woah! > > I find this deeply disturbing. I believe your heart is in the right > place here, so please don't take this as a personal attack, but this > statement reflects a view that I see expressed quite often and I think > we need to set the record straight on a few things. > > To be clear, what I'm about to express are my personal views and may > not align with those of Dan, Dave, Aslak and others who are driving > the BDD discussion. > > This is not a contest between approaches.
I'm pretty bad at the tongue-in-cheek thing. What I think newcomers to BDD will find - and that's because BDD advocates tend to explain this very well - is that BDD is strongly rooted in TDD, XP, and domain-driven design. My favorite way to explain BDD is: There's a quote that says "Seek not to follow in the footsteps of masters, seek what they sought." BDD presents the "seek what they sought" as first-level knowledge. I apologize for making a statement that might suggest there's a conflict where there isn't one. Pat _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
