Matt Aimonetti wrote: > new feature = new user stories = new specs = new failing examples = new > code to be written
That is top-down. Sometimes we must write new low-level code, typically bottom-up. Top-down tests often reach too far. We have all (maybe all) seen Rails "functional" tests that reached all the way thru a controller, into the model, and forced the model to express some behavior. Such tests should run closer to their tested code. And the point of RSpec is demonstrating behavior in customer terms (as you commendably achieved!). But expressing low-level behavior in customer terms might be less important than constraining it with terse - non-verbose - code statements that use _its_ terms. That's why TDD is "developer facing", not customer facing. Yes, RSpec is flexible enough to do TDD, but all the extra verbiage must be worst than just tedious. Doesn't it get in the way? -- Phlip --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
