On 08/07/2008, at 04:25 , yitzhakbg wrote:
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".
If I'm not expected to maintain the code, the project isn't going to
grow particularly big, and the interface has fewer than 7 major
functions, there's no real need to spec it out since you can hold the
entire design in your head.
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?
If you're trying to specify the design in the implementation phase,
then yes you're wasting time. The time isn't being wasted in writing
specs, it's already been wasted in committing design to paper without
trying out any of the major features to see that they make sense in
code.
There's one department at the University where I work that insists on
big design up front. They fully specify the software using UML or
whatever the flavour of the month is, then implement from that. Just
one more reason why I don't ever want to work within a bureaucracy.
Alex
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
