Surely Test Driven Development depends on how the developers work
with a given programming environment, not on the programming environment
itself?
Richmond.
On 4.11.2016 19:51, Richard Gaskin wrote:
One of many interesting discussions in our local LC User Group meeting
last night was from a relative newcomer who asked about TDD support.
I was able to tell him we have an assert command, and that many
developers have a wide range of ad hoc test harnesses in use.
But what I couldn't point him to is a single harness framework in our
community suitable for broad use.
Is there one?
If not, what would it look like?
How granularly should we write tests? How much value is there if the
writing of a test takes longer than writing the thing being tested?
Should we write a second test for when a handler in our core business
logic is integrated into a GUI, where the varieties of things that can
happen with input and events is much broader? Should a good harness
simulate GUI events? If so, how to make sure they attempt sufficient
erroneous inputs to ensure the scope of our error handling? How do we
chain tests into a comprehensive automated "Test All"?
So many questions...
How do we make one good test harness that answers them all, at least
reasonably well?
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
