Would BDD not be more accurately analogous with functional system testing
than integration testing as integration testing can a lot of the time
still imply a lot on the low level stuff.
It seems to me BDD would be best used to write scenarios along with
something like Selenium as the UI is the user's gateway to the behaviour?
I am not sure how that would work practically with a typical Selenium test
doing something like fill a form, click a button, wait for the page to
load, check the title and response, and check the database state etc. Does
this seem high level enough still to warrant being called BDD?
Chris
> Historically, BDD evolved out of attempts to improve TDD (sometimes
> you'll hear things like "BDD is TDD done right"),
> but nowadays I see it as something complementary and orthogonal to TDD
> (where by TDD one assumes unit-level testing).
>
> I agree with your interpretation of TDD as lower-level testing and BDD
> as higher-level.
>
> I don't quite agree with Rob's diagram: scenarios --> unit-tests
>
> True BDD scenarios may be run "technically" via JUnit but that does not
> make them unit-tests, just like one can run integration tests via
> JUnit. The nature of testing has more to do with the objective it has
> and the elements it interacts with.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
