http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=422442


in reply to Re^4: Programming is combat
in thread Programming is combat

Don’t forget specification-based testing à la tmoertel’s Test::LectroTest (which he talked about in RFC: Tutorial on Testing). I’ve tinkered with it some; when it fits the kind of unit being tested, it’s spectacular.

Makeshifts last the longest.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Programming is combat
by adrianh (Chancellor) on Apr 02, 2005 at 16:06 UTC
    Don't forget specification-based testing à la tmoertel's Test::LectroTest (which he talked about in RFC: Tutorial on Testing). I've tinkered with it some; when it fits the kind of unit being tested, it's spectacular.

    I agree that it's is useful stuff where it fits, but to be honest I don't find it fitting that often :-)

    The trouble I have applying specification based testing is that, like design by contract, it's tricky to apply incrementally. Personally I find TDD and specification based tests a bad fit since I now code in small increments, and specification based tests are very much all-or-nothing.

    Specification based tests are certainly a useful tool, but I don't find myself reaching for it very often.

[reply]

In Section Meditations