+1 So, what do we do to make it happen?
Doru On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com>wrote: > +1 to just add things with appropriate tests. > > in the case of Spec in particular, the problem is that is really hard to > have UI testing :( > Also… sometimes you break backward compatibility, that’s inevitable… and > is ok if is for the best (like in the case of Spec… it was to gain ui > platform independence). > > but anyway, I do agree that we need to raise our acceptance criteria :) > > Esteban > > On 09 Jan 2014, at 12:22, Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com> wrote: > > > We should have a policy on this. I've been guilty of writing new features > > without tests too. It's bad enough we have to deal with untested legacy > > code, but to replace key parts of the system with untested code doesn't > seem > > like such a good idea. In particular, the latest Spec refactoring broke a > > lot of the UI. It's a validation of how well it's been received. It has > > become a crucial part of much of the IDE. At various points in 3.0 the > > ChangeSorter, Versionner, and SliderModel have been broken, to name a > few, > > and I get mysterious and sudden, often image wrecking, DNUs that appear, > > like TextModel>>#asText. It's made it very hard to work, especially when > the > > compiler, RPackage, etc are changing (and sometimes breaking) at the same > > time. > > > > > > > > ----- > > Cheers, > > Sean > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/TDD-in-Core-tp4735378.html > > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
