Hi Joel! On 9/17/06, Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> 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@orangeandbronze.com mobile: +63 928 7291459 phone: +63 2 8943415 other: +1 408 4049532 blogs: http://mikhailberis.blogspot.com http://3w-agility.blogspot.com http://cplusplus-soup.blogspot.com