* Ricardo SIGNES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-06-21 02:40]:
> I advocate another form of this: synopsis-driven development.
>
> I write a five to ten line hypothetical use case (or longer,
> for modules whose most basic use would require it), and then
> say, "Wouldn't it be totally awesome if that /w
* James E Keenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-06-19T21:33:11]
> But, guess what? To the extent that I've been able to determine my own
> approach to development, I have increasingly moved in the direction of
> doing step 1 first: documentation-driven development.
>
> Or, perhaps more precisely, s
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andy
Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2007, at 10:52 AM, Mike Malony wrote:
>
> > So I'm working my project, and I've got one other more junior coder
> > with
> > me.
> >
> > Has anyone tried writing test files as part of their spec's?
> >
> > An ov
I've done test-driven-design/development but never written a whole
bunch of tests before writing any of the implementation code.
In the tests-as-spec area, how about writing a number of "user
acceptance tests" up front, as opposed to Unit Tests. The acceptance
tests could be in .t files if
On 20 Jun 2007, at 09:35, Ovid wrote:
[snip]
Planning out a "dream" API is a wonderful and powerful thing and
when done correctly, it can be useful. Thus, writing POD first
*might* be a good idea. However, I do agree with Shlomi on this.
I have grown to appreciate the ability to evolve m
- Original Message
From: Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I find that writing too much testing code at once without having a working
> code, and then trying to get it to pass incrementally (using TODO or SKIP or
> similar functionality), is sub-optimal.
> I prefer the incremental wri
