From: Richard MacDonald <macdonaldrj@...>
Date: 2001-12-15T10:30:12+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:28570] Re: John Roth dolt (  Re: A challenge to proponents of Unit Testing. )

"Ron Jeffries" <ronjeffries@REMOVEacm.org> wrote in message
news:A89DE76B766253AB.34293E197BFFC2CC.809AF8B964D7ECD2@lp.airnews.net...
> On 11 Dec 2001 06:55:24 -0800, rbinder@rbsc.com (Bob Binder) wrote:
>
Since Bob hasn't advertised himself, I will.
Bob wrote an encyclopedic book on OO
testing a yr or two ago. Its fantastic.
*Highly* recommended.

The sections of patterns for testing especially
gave me the most value. Anyone using the *Unit
frameworks (not to limit this to them) would benefit
from this book. What I found most interesting is
that these patterns are foreign to those of
us who work in normal domains. Imagine a book
that introduced a whole series of important patterns
that you had never thought of. . .well, I got very
excited, I tell you, and I annoyed my work mates
by pushing the book on them as well :-)

Having said that, there is anal and then there are
testers. Most of us work in domains where the
ultra-test mentality is not required (perhaps because
there are not enough good testers to go around and
project teams do not sufficiently recognize
their value). We would do
well in these discussions to recognize which group
we are in and which group we are talking to. I,
for one, recognized from Bob's book that a
dedicated professional tester is a special breed.

But I also think Kent's tests are "good enough" :-))