August 2017

On Pairing

A friend asks what to do about a bad pair. That’s a juicy one, and prods me to muse. Why do we pair? It’s one of the techniques we adopt to increase productivity. That’s measured in geekery by insights per hour, or such like. Maybe if we understand what makes good pairing, we can get […]

On Pairing Read More »

Five Underplayed Premises of TDD

This entry is part [part not set] of 9 in the series Underplayed Premises

UPDATE: This post has been restructured and made into a video, you can view it here. Here are five underplayed premises of TDD. Why "underplayed"? Well, they’re there. Hardcore TDD’ers model them all the time. But it feels like they just don’t get the camera time. I want TDD coaches and teachers to step back

Five Underplayed Premises of TDD Read More »

Automocking: Don’t Take Hard Shots

This entry is part [part not set] of 2 in the series Automocking

Yesterday, I started my explanation about not using automockers. But that muse is about just one aspect of the automocking world: interaction tests. And automockers can do a lot more than that. We could use an automocker for years without ever writing an interaction test. So, then, again, why don’t I? I’m an old fart,

Automocking: Don’t Take Hard Shots Read More »

Automocking: Behavior Tests Are Not Quite

This entry is part [part not set] of 2 in the series Automocking

So, with the intent firmly in our minds, from yesterday, I feel closer to explaining my automock resistance. There is still some teasing apart to do. Automocking tools bring several possible aspects to the floor. The first of these is by no means required by automockers, but is commonplace. And that is behavior-based testing. Behavior-based

Automocking: Behavior Tests Are Not Quite Read More »

Scroll to Top