From: Michael Campbell <michael_s_campbell@...>
Date: 2003-01-09T23:27:41+09:00
Subject: Re: Test::Unit fails w/no tests [was: testunit 0.1.6 problems]

> I can see that. But playing devil's advocate, I think I see
> the reasoning the other way also.
> 
> Aren't the XPers always saying, "Write the test first. Since the
> code
> doesn't exist yet, the test will fail." A new test, then, fails by
> default.

Only because there isn't code TO test, not because of any "newness"
OF the test.

If I write a test that simply asserts "true", the test is hardly
complete, but it doesn't fail.  To me, an empty unit test is like
that.  Incomplete != failure.





=====
--

Yahoo IM: michael_s_campbell

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com