Hi Koen!
This is nice indeed!
I wonder, are there any good practices/recommendations regarding how to share
state between steps?
For example,
Let’s say I have a scenario:
- two browsers do not share state
given that I open *a browser*
and I open *another* browser
when I select Y on the first browser
then the first browser selected blah is X
Should this scenario be in a separate feature (shared state?), and all states
related to this be in the shared state?
What kind of heuristics do people use to say things like:
- ok, these two things will be two scenarios of the same feature
- and here, these two need to be in separate features
I imagine that a “purist” (:D) would try to make features more
business-oriented.
But I cannot stop thinking that some “ease of implementation” can creep inside
if they simplify the test writing.
Do you have some experience on these things?
G
> Le 9 mars 2025 à 10:18 PM, Richard O'Keefe <rao...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> I was working on Gherkin-for-Smalltalk myself, but hadn’t got nearly this
> far. You have taken a radically different approach from mine, and I have to
> say that yours is more Smalltalkish than mine. This is brilliant stuff and i
> look forward to the release.
>
> As one of my previous managers used to say, “you’re a hero!”
>
>
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 8:20 AM, Koen De Hondt
> <k...@all-objects-all-the-time.st <mailto:k...@all-objects-all-the-time.st>>
> wrote:
>> Dear Pharo users and developers,
>>
>> In my series of blog posts on testing, I published a new post on tools for
>> running Gherkin-style test scenarios in Pharo. See
>> https://all-objects-all-the-time.st/#/blog/posts/13. It is an introduction.
>> Future posts will dig into the details.
>>
>> As always, all feedback is welcome.
>>
>> Happy reading!
>>
>> Ciao,
>> Koen
>>
