开云体育

So I'm reading this so-called "book" you wrote, and I'm enjoying it and all, and then I get to page /21 of 21/ and /22 of 22/ (thats what is says!). And what do I see ? testAddition fails because of

I think it's important for interfaces to capture the semantics of the design (and hopefully the metaphor/problem domain as fully as possible), because this is something that the programmers need to

There have been several complaints that the tests as written in the examples aren't minimal. There are parameters there that aren't used, methods with a null implementation, and so on. When I write

Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the testdrivendevelopment group. File : /TDD140202.PDF Uploaded by :

the gap have only but for This sentences were very valuable to me. I suggest to insert them into the book. Would you agree to the following? Decision: use Value Object Pattern Feedback: I have to

Solution is uploaded including the build.xml Etienne and I used to do the zipping. I hope that the steps between the zips are not too big. I assume you can do the "interpolation". We did not zip

we have a similar experience when using mock objects. The first question you ask is which object to verify (i.e. who would know that you've done the right thing). Once you've sorted that out, the rest

"It is my considered opinion that the original example is a violation of TDD and that the alternative is superior in all aspects but one: it is much harder to show how to go off road." Re: violation.

I gave the Dollar solution my honest best try and it just doesn't make any sense to me. Can someone send me the sequence of tests and code that gets you to a cleanly factored solution for USD + GBP

consistently do How often do I do this? I do this when I am writing the first few tests for a new class. Once I have written a few tests and methods I do it less often. Jim

Alan: Ditto, not only do I find myself doing the assert first whenever I can't think of what to write (which is most of the time), but I have found it to be the fastest way to getting an "aha" moment

Just great, would also make an excellent "bye-me" on the back cover. cheers Mittie

I'm thinking of this as a motivating first chapter. Assume I tell the story in a bit more compelling way :-). Does it motivate the rest of the book? What seems to be missing without something like

I support your point. I assume you're not a kind of programmer that would follow a directive word-by-word. Neither do I. Chances are: nobody does, really. If forced to do so, we say goodbye. When

consistently do I confess to not having read the manuscript yet, but are you atlking about making the first thing you write in the test method the assertion ? If so, since you /repeatedly/ made the

Triangulation is the process of finding a remote point by getting the angle to it from two points with known distance and orientation, and then doing that sin/cos/tangent stuff. A little picture would

The "negative" tests seem to be a variation or a special instance of the Triangulate pattern. I guess I have to give an example. The example is how CanooWebTest does selftesting by applying it to

Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the testdrivendevelopment group. File : /TDD120202.PDF Uploaded by :

"Lately we used "negative tests" to drive the code from constants to calculation. starting with an assert and a constant implementation we write a second assert that shows how the code is expected to

My model is that you push one button. If the system builds and the tests pass, the code is checked in. In the normal case the process should require no intervention. If this doesn't make sense the way