Interesting statement that I have heard several times before, and it all boils down to how one measures cost. If you measure the cost of an application only in the time it takes to write the first line of code to the last line of code for the first and only release, then yes, you could argue that removing the tests would technically make it cheaper. However, I've never defined the cost of an application like that. The reason being, the application spends more of its life cycle in subsequent releases (release 2 through release N). That being said, the ROI on testing (behavioral or state based) becomes more apparent in future subsequent release as they take less time to move through the development life cycle. This is primarily due to the design being better, as it is more conducive to change (testing usually produces this side effect IMO), and releases test quicker, as you have that rich suite of tests to support development and testing efforts. Just my $0.02.

Anthony Broad-Crawford

On Jul 7, 2008, at 2:25 PM, yitzhakbg wrote:


This might be a loaded question on this forum, but here goes:
Just had a discussion with a prospective employer, a Ruby On Rails shop. His reaction to BDD development on every project was skeptical, saying something like: "It depends on the project". "Some jobs are so short that the extra
time invested in developing tests doesn't justify the cost".
He was insistent that writing tests costs more. After all, you write twice:
first the tests, then the code (or the other way 'round).
My question is: From hard, practical, cold real world experience, is that
so? Is BDD development more expensive? Let me qualify that. One could
answer, "no, since the tests save you pain and heartache down the line". The
question is whether BDD coding with RSpec is more expensive in the
implementation phase and how much truth there is in the statement that BDD
isn't for every project, like quick knock ups for example?
--
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Is-BDD-with-RSpec-cheaper--tp18323328p18323328.html
Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

Reply via email to