On Mar 19, 2008, at 3:21 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Glenn Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 19, 2008, at 1:03 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>> Again - this is a matter of granularity. The whole point of having
>>> granular examples is to enable you to m
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Glenn Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mar 19, 2008, at 1:03 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
> > Again - this is a matter of granularity. The whole point of having
> > granular examples is to enable you to make changes to the system
> > easily via refactoring. S
On Mar 19, 2008, at 1:03 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:42 AM, Glenn Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
[Big Snip]
>>
>>
>>>
>>> There are a few bad assumptions in your colleague's response, so to
>>> set the record straight:
>>>
>>> * test coverage and tests which u
On Mar 19, 2008, at 8:42 AM, Glenn Ford wrote:
> My primary concern when writing my specs that are to cover complicated
> features is that I do NOT want false confidence. If I write a spec,
> and it passes, I want that to mean it works in my app. When the spec
> goes green, my next step is to g
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:42 AM, Glenn Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> [Big Snip]
>
>
> >
> > There are a few bad assumptions in your colleague's response, so to
> > set the record straight:
> >
> > * test coverage and tests which use the interaction-based test
> > approach are not mutua
>> [Big Snip]
>
> There are a few bad assumptions in your colleague's response, so to
> set the record straight:
>
> * test coverage and tests which use the interaction-based test
> approach are not mutually exclusive
> * you can have crappy tests which take the state-based approach and
> crappy te
Hello,
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 4:15 AM, David Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello fellow RSpec users.
>
> Before you all start warming up your flame throwers please let me explain my
> Subject line.
>
> I've been working over 4 months on a large Rails project with a few other
> developers.
On Mar 18, 2008, at 6:36 AM, Alan Larkin wrote:
> David Schmidt wrote:
>> Hello fellow RSpec users.
>>
>> Before you all start warming up your flame throwers please let me
>> explain my Subject line.
>>
>> I've been working over 4 months on a large Rails project with a few
>> other developers. Te
David Schmidt wrote:
> Hello fellow RSpec users.
>
> Before you all start warming up your flame throwers please let me
> explain my Subject line.
>
> I've been working over 4 months on a large Rails project with a few
> other developers. Test coverage was spotty at best, though they *were*
>
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 5:04 AM, Chris Parsons
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi David
>
>
> On 18 Mar 2008, at 08:15, David Schmidt wrote:
>
> > Here is his email to me, less his signature as I don't want to make
> > this personal. I'd like to see what the RSpec user community has to
> > say in
Hi David
On 18 Mar 2008, at 08:15, David Schmidt wrote:
> Here is his email to me, less his signature as I don't want to make
> this personal. I'd like to see what the RSpec user community has to
> say in response to his comments, below:
[snip email]
For me, it basically boils down to: use
Hello fellow RSpec users.
Before you all start warming up your flame throwers please let me
explain my Subject line.
I've been working over 4 months on a large Rails project with a few
other developers. Test coverage was spotty at best, though they
*were* RSpec tests. One of the other d
12 matches
Mail list logo
