On 28 Apr 2008, at 07:17, David Chelimsky wrote:
Also, this approach increases the level of granularity from
individual messages to complete statements. For example, let's say I
have this line commented:
# do_something if this_condition and that_condition
If this_condition and that_condition always return the same boolean
value, there is no need for a test for that_condition to exist. Nor
should it exist without having been driven into existence by an
example.
So the approach of uncommenting prototype code still leaves you with
code that is less clean, if only slightly, than code which is purely
driven out by examples.
Hmm, I have never found this in practice. In fact, about a month ago
I was working on someone else's code and followed this process of
uncommenting code as I wrote the specs for it (there were none for
that class). I actually *removed* the 'if this_condition and
that_condition' part of a line that follows the pattern you gave above.
I don't see how you could end up with redundant code following this
process. Perhaps I am doing something different that I didn't
explain. Maybe it's because I am blanking out what the code says when
I write the specs? I don't know, but I haven't found the problem you
describe above.
Ashley
--
http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
http://aviewfromafar.net/
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
