Re: [boost] Interest in a Behavior Driven Development Framework

From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-17 23:21:56

Hi Joel!

On 9/17/06, Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Fair enough. Perhaps I was just taken aback by the hype. I find it
> alarming whenever I read things like "the next big thing", a
> "revolution", etc. Reminds me a lot about Java. (sorry, can't resist).
>

Yeah... I kinda glossed over that, and was just amazed at the
"readable" sample that the guy in the video was showing (in the ruby
examples). :-) I never really took it as a "revolution" or "next big
thing". :-D However I agree about the Java comment. :-D

> Anyway, I should assert (pardon the pun ;) ) that behavior
> specification in code (as a DSEL?) is an illusion. People
> would tend to believe that with it, you can specify a program
> behavior and get away with no documentation. Proof in point:
> Richard Newman's post (unless I misunderstood him). That makes
> me worry.
>

It's a bit of a stretch, but I think the BDD interface to
specification as opposed to the Assert methods for TDD are mere
alternatives to each other. Because:

ASSERT_EQUAL(a, 10)

Is pretty much tantamount and equivalent to:

value(a).should.equal(10);

It's a case of "Tomaytoe" "Tomahtoe" :-D

-- 
Dean Michael C. Berris
C++ Software Architect
Orange and Bronze Software Labs, Ltd. Co.
web: http://software.orangeandbronze.com/
email: dean_at_[hidden]
mobile: [phone]
phone: [phone]
other: [phone]
blogs: http://mikhailberis.blogspot.com http://3w-agility.blogspot.com
http://cplusplus-soup.blogspot.com