[rspec-users] bad specs better than none?

Joseph Anthony Pasquale Holsten joseph at josephholsten.com
Thu Feb 28 00:09:52 EST 2008

On 02008:02:27, at 10:01CST, Maurício Linhares wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:59 AM, aslak hellesoy
> <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>  I also had to go into specs on a project I'm not working on, and  
>>> found
>>>  an unholy hive of database-accessing specs. It's disheartening.
>>>  Basically, it's cargo cult development practices - using the "best
>>>  practice" without actually understanding it.
>>  What "best practice" are you referring to?
> I'm also interested in discovering what is this "best practice".
> I can't see any problem in specs running against a database, that's
> exactly what integration testing is about, shouldn't we do integration
> testing just because we're using BDD? I really don't think so.
> The big problem about specs running against a database is not knowing
> that it's integration testing and also that specs that access
> databases run slower than "pure" unit tests, but you can't be sure
> that your app works without a bunch of integration tests.

I'm reminded of one of my heros, Matthias Felleisen. If you don't  
know exactly what I'm talking about, go here: <http://htdp.org/>. His  
mission in life is to teach the pattern to design programs. His  
approach draws more from the Design by Contract paradigm than TDD,  
but it's the same goal.

If you can ever stop in at Northeastern University in Boston, drop in  
on a class. Especially the freshman intro to programming. If we can't  
teach the method as well as him, we're screwed. Because he's been  
working on it for twenty years.

Of course, my hope is that hackety.org + bdd = hdtp++. I can dream, no?

http:// Joseph Holsten .com

More information about the rspec-users mailing list