Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[XP] Re: Unit vs Integration TDD

Expand Messages
  • Matt
    Ron, ... all ... gets ... I suppose. Although when I entered the web address to get to my gmail it had to know what to do if I put http:// in first or mail.
    Message 1 of 36 , Oct 31, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron,

      --- In extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Ron Jeffries
      <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hello, Matt. On Friday, October 31, 2008, at 4:19:34 PM, you
      > wrote:
      >
      > > The response I usually get from BDD guys is "who cares about testing
      all
      > > the permutations?" and my response usually is "my boss... since he
      gets
      > > the irate calls about bugs". :)
      >
      > Perhaps the problem is having the permutations.
      >

      I suppose. Although when I entered the web address to get to my gmail
      it had to know what to do if I put http:// in first or mail. or just
      google.com. And then of course if I put in an invalid page it had to
      know what to do if I got redirected. Or just display an error message.
      Or if I have a search page defined and I didn't put in http:// then
      maybe it should do a search on whatever it couldn't find. Or if I
      didn't put in http:// and I don't have a search page what should it do?
      And since I am using FF it also had to find a list of all the pages I
      have visited recently that match the things I type in.

      And I haven't even gotten to gmail the application yet.

      So how would you approach eliminating permutations?

      Matt
    • Rick Mugridge
      ... I believe that it s not the scale of the test that should determine who writes it. It s instead whether the tests expresses stuff that s part of the
      Message 36 of 36 , Nov 8, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        J. B. Rainsberger wrote:
        > I suggest programmers focus on isolated object tests and testers focus
        > on integration and end-to-end tests. If they do that, then they'll
        > come together pretty well at some point.
        > ----

        I believe that it's not the scale of the test that should determine who
        writes it.

        It's instead whether the tests expresses stuff that's part of the
        problem space or part of the solution space. Of course, where that
        boundary sits is critically dependent on the project and who is
        involved. And it changes as the problem, and solution, are better
        understood.

        And there can be several layers, with a solution space at one level
        being a problem space at another. So, for example, I'm happy to use
        storytests for specifying the technical details of communication with
        another system that is managed by another team. And I'm happy to have
        some storytests that mock out that other system so that we can use
        additive "specification"/testing rather than multiplicative across the
        systems. As always, we still need some end-to-end to ensure it's all
        wired together correctly and that failure modes across them are managed
        correctly.

        So I find the usual distinctions between unit tests and end-to-end tests
        and X, Y, Z tests to be unhelpful. As it's too late and too hard to
        refactor the terminology, I try (unsuccessfully) to avoid it.

        I prefer Brian Marick's distinction between customer-facing and
        programmer-facing tests.

        Cheers, Rick
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.