Justin W. Reagor on 18 Sep 2007 12:20:47 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PhillyOnRails] rspec slides

  • From: "Justin W. Reagor" <justinwr@gmail.com>
  • To: talk@phillyonrails.org
  • Subject: Re: [PhillyOnRails] rspec slides
  • Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 08:20:31 -0400
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; bh=zl+uErRh77PE82B+mUp4K/nxUj28mV88XbmFFF45mvA=; b=mIi35I6c2Y4uE5Z2LezVY0XwE1U/E5IVAQ2Bi3B55z9RwrF8ic9R6OH5O6O9WrWAyfgoDbMFDM2Y7GxiWSEztIPpzk0ryIRV+Tw1N31V6hMsp7zTO/rH4E9g/1y6ObmU5F1Pr1rrbWeZx6Caye9RY8UeptDdSivyjFlYDZXkKoM=
  • List-archive: <http://lists.phillyonrails.org/pipermail/talk>
  • Reply-to: talk@phillyonrails.org
  • Sender: talk-bounces@phillyonrails.org

Yes, I believe Colin was the first to show me heckle... though I have not put it into play during my normal development cycles.

:: Justin Reagor

On Sep 18, 2007, at 6:29 AM, Cliff Moon wrote:

Somewhere on this thread someone mentioned about not being able to tell
a good test from a bad test.  This got me thinking and I remembered
seeing a tool somewhere for testing the efficacy of your tests.  Turns
out I was thinking of heckle:
It mutates portions of your code under test to verify that your tests
fail.  The idea being, that if a mutation doesn't fail a test, you
either aren't testing correctly or the code in question doesn't do anything.

Justin W. Reagor wrote:
Well said! Or maybe its because I work for you... HAH :P

:: Justin Reagor
:: justinwr@gmail.com <mailto:justinwr@gmail.com>

On Sep 13, 2007, at 4:12 PM, Colin A. Bartlett wrote:

Cliff Moon wrote:
As for BDD, my understanding is that the point of it is to make your
tests into executable documentation. 
This is the most exciting thing to me about RSpec and BDD and what
drew me to it in the first place.

My role involves more customer relationship handling then coding and
the idea that we could build, with the client, specifications for the
application, and then use that as executable document for building
the app was, and is, thrilling.

And the fact that these specs could easily grow overtime and continue
to be an updated documentation makes it even better. No more running
back to the docs to ensure you added the change the client just asked
you to shoe-horn in.

I love the specdoc output formatter for RSpec. I've used that to
generate a document for the client to say "This is what your
application is doing. If it's not on here, don't assume it's doing
it." In my experience, having a client assume stuff can be a royal
pain in the ass.

"You're supposed to know what you're doing. I just assumed you'd
require people to enter their dog's middle name to gain access."

Colin A. Bartlett
Kinetic Web Solutions

To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:


To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:

To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:

To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: