[Haskell-cafe] HSpec vs Doctest for TDD
johan.g.larson at gmail.com
Wed Jun 25 22:53:37 UTC 2014
Has anyone here actually done strict TDD?
I would expect strict TDD-based development (with no substantial design up
front) to gradually build up a system from fuzzy ideas. This would grow
increasingly unwieldy until the designer got fed up trying to keep it all
together and redesigned it from scratch. And for a large system there could
be several such redesign-completely episodes.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:26 PM, MigMit <miguelimo38 at yandex.ru> wrote:
> And TDD is not the same as having tests, so please stop arguing for the
> second while pretending to be arguing for the first.
> Отправлено с iPhone
> > 26 июня 2014 г., в 0:21, Frerich Raabe <raabe at froglogic.com> написал(а):
> >> On 2014-06-25 18:05, MigMit wrote:
> >> Again, nobody here suggests that tests aren't necessary.
> > And rightfully so! TDD is not "a poor substitute for type safety" (as
> you put it in your earlier mail) at all.
> > In fact, strong type systems complement test-driven development very
> nicely. An expressive type system greatly simplifies testing because the
> compiler can catch a larger classes of mistakes and because - in the case
> of pure functions - the function signatures very clearly communicate the
> required input and output. There are no hidden dependencies and there's no
> setup or tear-down work required.
> > So I'd argue that test-driven development is relevant *because* of
> Haskell's type system, not *in spite of* it.
> > --
> > Frerich Raabe - raabe at froglogic.com
> > www.froglogic.com - Multi-Platform GUI Testing
> > _______________________________________________
> > Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> > Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
Johan Larson -- Toronto, Canada
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe