[rspec-users] Cucumber Feature Scenario critique

James Byrne lists at ruby-forum.com
Mon Mar 2 10:31:43 EST 2009

Andrew Premdas wrote:
> James,

> I'd question whether you need to give a monkey's about 'entity'. Whilst 
> it maybe an essential concept in the overall legal framework that doesn't 
> mean it has to be in YOUR world. If your software is about recording services
> provided to some client and related payments. You can simplify - you can
> just choose not to model all that legal stuff. If you model everything
> you'll

I have been mulling this over these past few days.  I now think that 
what is wrong, besides having as yet only vague ideas of how this is all 
meant to work, is that I am injecting too many implementation details 
into the features and scenarios.  Whether or not a client is a 
stand-alone design element or is dependent upon a superior element of 
abstraction is really quite beside the point insofar as the presentation 
of the system to the user is concerned.  I now believe that I should 
just be writing down whatever it is that a client has to be in order to 
satisfy the business requirements. If we need a higher level of 
abstraction to capture other attributes then that should remain 
invisible to the users.

Of course, realizing this issue and actually dealing with it are two 
different things.  I will probably experience a great deal of difficulty 
arriving at a balance between expression and implementation.
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

More information about the rspec-users mailing list