# New article **URL:** \ **Category:** ruby-talk\ **Created:** [24 May 2005 18:03 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601 "2005-05-24T18:03:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Guest15](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6de8d8/32.png) [@Guest15](https://rubytalk.org/u/Guest15)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 18:03 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/1 "2005-05-24T18:03:47Z")
Sorry for posting about my own article, but I'm interested in feedback, recommendations for future topics, etc. IBM has just published an article I wrote about doing test first development with Ruby: [http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/os-dw-os-ruby1-i.html](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/os-dw-os-ruby1-i.html) (sorry, you need to sign in (free account) to read it). I've got an opportunity to do some more writing for them (how much more depends on how well received/popular the articles are), and I'd love to get some feedback from the community about what kinds of Ruby things I should be sending their way. > **···** > > -- > thanks, > -pate > ------------------------- > We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because > they want to know something else, and would therefore only > misunderstand what we said > - the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith) ---
**Author:** ![Anonymous\_Coward](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/94ad74/32.png) [@Anonymous\_Coward](https://rubytalk.org/u/Anonymous_Coward)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 18:13 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/2 "2005-05-24T18:13:54Z")
> Sorry for posting about my own article, but I'm interested in feedback, > recommendations for future topics, etc. IBM has just published an > article I wrote about doing test first development with Ruby: > > [IBM Developer](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/os-dw-os-ruby1-i.html) > > (sorry, you need to sign in (free account) to read it). I generally am opposed to registering for free content (paid stuff is obviously different). One may visit [http://www.bugmenot.com](http://www.bugmenot.com) to bypass registration. Good article. > I've got an opportunity to do some more writing for them (how much > more depends on how well received/popular the articles are), and I'd > love to get some feedback from the community about what kinds of > Ruby things I should be sending their way. > > -- > thanks, > -pate E > **···** > > Le 24/5/2005, "pat eyler" \ a écrit: > > -- > template\ > void quack(duck& d) { d.quack(); } ---
**Author:** ![gabriele\_renzi5](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e79b87/32.png) [@gabriele\_renzi5](https://rubytalk.org/u/gabriele_renzi5)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 18:40 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/3 "2005-05-24T18:40:17Z")
pat eyler ha scritto: > Sorry for posting about my own article, but I'm interested in feedback, recommendations for future topics, etc. IBM has just published an > article I wrote about doing test first development with Ruby: > > [IBM Developer](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/os-dw-os-ruby1-i.html) > > (sorry, you need to sign in (free account) to read it). > > I've got an opportunity to do some more writing for them (how much > more depends on how well received/popular the articles are), and I'd > love to get some feedback from the community about what kinds of > Ruby things I should be sending their way. I think it is a nice article. OTOH I'd have loved to see some information on how to test this for network problems, since a friend of mine just had this kind of problems: how to be sure that my code won't bomb down if the dns goes mad or the network interface breaks or whatever? But probably this is out of the scope of the article. Also, why are you putting the mock data in the DATA pseudofile instead of a real external file ? ---
**Author:** ![James\_Britt4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a3d4f5/32.png) [@James\_Britt4](https://rubytalk.org/u/James_Britt4)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 20:19 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/4 "2005-05-24T20:19:58Z")
pat eyler wrote: > Sorry for posting about my own article, but I'm interested in feedback, recommendations for future topics, etc. IBM has just published an > article I wrote about doing test first development with Ruby: > > [IBM Developer](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/os-dw-os-ruby1-i.html) > > (sorry, you need to sign in (free account) to read it). > > I've got an opportunity to do some more writing for them (how much > more depends on how well received/popular the articles are), and I'd > love to get some feedback from the community about what kinds of > Ruby things I should be sending their way. I just started going through the article, but (as is my inclination) I took a peek at the Resources page, and I'm curious why ruby-doc.org wasn't listed. Thanks, James Britt > **···** > > -- > > [http://www.ruby-doc.org](http://www.ruby-doc.org) - The Ruby Documentation Site > [http://www.rubyxml.com](http://www.rubyxml.com) - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML > [http://www.rubystuff.com](http://www.rubystuff.com) - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff > [http://www.jamesbritt.com](http://www.jamesbritt.com) - Playing with Better Toys ---
**Author:** ![Brian\_Schroder1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2bfe46/32.png) [@Brian\_Schroder1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Brian_Schroder1)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 21:06 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/5 "2005-05-24T21:06:44Z")
Just started with your article, and I wonder why you build a constructor that tests for object classes, why not simply call .to\_s on the argument? class T attr\_reader :key def initialize(key)    @key = key.to\_s   end en [T.new(1).key, T.new("1").key, T.new([1]).key] =\> ["1", "1", "1"] best regards, Brian > **···** > > On 24/05/05, pat eyler \ wrote: > > > Sorry for posting about my own article, but I'm interested in feedback, > > recommendations for future topics, etc. IBM has just published an > > article I wrote about doing test first development with Ruby: > > > > [IBM Developer](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/os-dw-os-ruby1-i.html) > > > > (sorry, you need to sign in (free account) to read it). > > > > I've got an opportunity to do some more writing for them (how much > > more depends on how well received/popular the articles are), and I'd > > love to get some feedback from the community about what kinds of > > Ruby things I should be sending their way. > > > > -- > > thanks, > > -pate > > ------------------------- > > We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because > > they want to know something else, and would therefore only > > misunderstand what we said > > - the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith) > > -- > [http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/](http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/) > > Stringed instrument chords: [http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/](http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/) ---
**Author:** ![Ghislain\_MARY](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@Ghislain\_MARY](https://rubytalk.org/u/Ghislain_MARY)\ **Post date:** [7 June 2005 22:12 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/6 "2005-06-07T22:12:24Z")
Hi, pat eyler a écrit : > Sorry for posting about my own article, but I'm interested in feedback, recommendations for future topics, etc. IBM has just published an > article I wrote about doing test first development with Ruby: > > [IBM Developer](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/os-dw-os-ruby1-i.html) > > (sorry, you need to sign in (free account) to read it). > > I've got an opportunity to do some more writing for them (how much > more depends on how well received/popular the articles are), and I'd > love to get some feedback from the community about what kinds of > Ruby things I should be sending their way. Sorry for the late reply but I didn't have the time to read this article before today. First, I'd like to say that I found this article very interesting and well written (easily understable by a newbie I think). But I have a question. The article is entitled 'Test-first programming with Ruby' but when talking about ZenTest you tell that it "can also work in reverse, loading a test suite and writing code stubs for every test" which corresponds to what this is all about. However the examples you are showing after that are examples to go from code to tests. Why didn't you show how to go from tests to code using ZenTest? Ghislain ---
**Author:** ![Gavri\_Fernandez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Gavri\_Fernandez](https://rubytalk.org/u/Gavri_Fernandez)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 18:28 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/7 "2005-05-24T18:28:27Z")
IBM probably wouldn't mind if you pay them for reading this article. > **···** > > On 5/24/05, ES \ wrote: > > > I generally am opposed to registering for free content (paid stuff > > is obviously different). > > -- > Gavri > > > **[Dentistry in Todays World](https://ga-woo.livejournal.com/)** > > > > ga\_woo - the new blog in LiveJournal. There should be new interesting records soon. ---
**Author:** ![Ara.T.Howard6](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/958977/32.png) [@Ara.T.Howard6](https://rubytalk.org/u/Ara.T.Howard6)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 18:38 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/8 "2005-05-24T18:38:30Z")
bless you. -a > **···** > > On Wed, 25 May 2005, ES wrote: > > > Le 24/5/2005, "pat eyler" \ a écrit: > > > > > Sorry for posting about my own article, but I'm interested in feedback, > > > recommendations for future topics, etc. IBM has just published an > > > article I wrote about doing test first development with Ruby: > > > > > > [IBM Developer](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/os-dw-os-ruby1-i.html) > > > > > > (sorry, you need to sign in (free account) to read it). > > > > I generally am opposed to registering for free content (paid stuff > > is obviously different). One may visit [http://www.bugmenot.com](http://www.bugmenot.com) to > > bypass registration. > > # -- > > > email :: ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov > > phone :: 303.497.6469 > > My religion is very simple. My religion is kindness. > > --Tenzin Gyatso > > =============================================================================== ---
**Author:** ![Guest15](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6de8d8/32.png) [@Guest15](https://rubytalk.org/u/Guest15)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 18:47 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/9 "2005-05-24T18:47:48Z")
> I think it is a nice article. > OTOH I'd have loved to see some information on how to test this for > network problems, since a friend of mine just had this kind of problems: > how to be sure that my code won't bomb down if the dns goes mad or the > network interface breaks or whatever? But probably this is out of the > scope of the article. Yeah, out of scope for this one, but it sounds like an interesting problem to write about. I think mock objects are the right answer. > Also, why are you putting the mock data in the DATA pseudofile instead > of a real external file ? For a small amount of data, using the DATA pseudofile was easier (keeping everything together), but as r43 has grown, I'm getting ready to split it out into a separate file. > **···** > > On 5/24/05, gabriele renzi \ wrote: > > -- > thanks, > -pate > ------------------------- > We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because > they want to know something else, and would therefore only > misunderstand what we said > - the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith) ---
**Author:** ![Guest15](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6de8d8/32.png) [@Guest15](https://rubytalk.org/u/Guest15)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 20:25 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/10 "2005-05-24T20:25:40Z")
> I just started going through the article, but (as is my inclination) I > took a peek at the Resources page, and I'm curious why ruby-doc.org > wasn't listed. Braino on my part. I think that I make less use of ruby-doc.org than I should. I'll try to change my personal usage habit, and will make sure it shows up in future articles. > **···** > > On 5/24/05, James Britt \ wrote: > > > Thanks, > > > > James Britt > > > > -- > > > > [http://www.ruby-doc.org](http://www.ruby-doc.org) - The Ruby Documentation Site > > [http://www.rubyxml.com](http://www.rubyxml.com) - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML > > [http://www.rubystuff.com](http://www.rubystuff.com) - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff > > [http://www.jamesbritt.com](http://www.jamesbritt.com) - Playing with Better Toys > > -- > thanks, > -pate > ------------------------- > We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because > they want to know something else, and would therefore only > misunderstand what we said > - the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith) ---
**Author:** ![Guest15](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6de8d8/32.png) [@Guest15](https://rubytalk.org/u/Guest15)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 21:24 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/11 "2005-05-24T21:24:34Z")
> Just started with your article, and I wonder why you build a > constructor that tests for object classes, why not simply call .to\_s > on the argument? I wrote it that way to create some (artificial, but easy to see) boundary conditions for the article, this test doesn't actually show up in the released versions of r43. It would have been better to be able to verify the format of the id strings, but I wasn't able to find that kind of information about them. Actually testing it the way I did was a bit of a stretch. In the case of the test key '1234' you could have a Numeric, but the real keys all seem to be alphanumeric. It's certainly possible to create an Array that would be stringified into a valid key as well, e.g. ["1", "2", "3", "4"]. > **···** > > On 5/24/05, Brian Schröder \ wrote: > > > class T > > attr\_reader :key > > > > def initialize(key) > >    @key = key.to\_s > >   end > > en > > > > [T.new(1).key, T.new("1").key, T.new([1]).key] =\> ["1", "1", "1"] > > > > best regards, > > > > Brian > > > > -- > > [http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/](http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/) > > > > Stringed instrument chords: [http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/](http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/) > > -- > thanks, > -pate > ------------------------- > We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because > they want to know something else, and would therefore only > misunderstand what we said > - the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith) ---
**Author:** ![Guest15](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6de8d8/32.png) [@Guest15](https://rubytalk.org/u/Guest15)\ **Post date:** [7 June 2005 22:25 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/12 "2005-06-07T22:25:59Z")
> Hi, > > Sorry for the late reply but I didn't have the time to read this article > before today. No problems, feedback is always good. > First, I'd like to say that I found this article very interesting and > well written (easily understable by a newbie I think). Good, that's my target. > But I have a question. The article is entitled 'Test-first programming > with Ruby' but when talking about ZenTest you tell that it "can also > work in reverse, loading a test suite and writing code stubs for every > test" which corresponds to what this is all about. However the examples > you are showing after that are examples to go from code to tests. Why > didn't you show how to go from tests to code using ZenTest? I did, perhaps it didn't show up very well: Letting ZenTest write code stubs for you works the same way. If you were to run the tool against your existing ts\_r43.rb like 'ZenTest.rb ts\_r43.rb', it would generate the output shown here: 1 class R43 2 def key 3 raise NotImplementedError, 'Need to write key' 4 end 5 def echo 6 raise NotImplementedError, 'Need to write echo' 7 end 8 end       Since all that ZenTest is writing for you are code stubs (which look a \*lot\* like test stubs) I probably need to be more explicit about what's going on. > **···** > > On 6/7/05, Ghislain Mary \ wrote: > > > Ghislain > > -- > thanks, > -pate > ------------------------- > We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because > they want to know something else, and would therefore only > misunderstand what we said > - the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith) ---
**Author:** ![Jacob\_Fugal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@Jacob\_Fugal](https://rubytalk.org/u/Jacob_Fugal)\ **Post date:** [7 June 2005 22:36 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/13 "2005-06-07T22:36:47Z")
Disclaimer: I've never actually used ZenTest, so I may be wrong, but having read a little about it this is my understanding... > But I have a question. The article is entitled 'Test-first programming > with Ruby' but when talking about ZenTest you tell that it "can also > work in reverse, loading a test suite and writing code stubs for every > test" which corresponds to what this is all about. However the examples > you are showing after that are examples to go from code to tests. Why > didn't you show how to go from tests to code using ZenTest? I believe that you are misinterpreting the (admittedly ambiguous) statement "loading a test suite and writing code stubs for every test". From my understanding of ZenTest, the noun "test suite" would refer to the code base to be tested plus any existing tests, and the "code stubs" are stubs for new tests, not stubs for the code being tested. E.g. my code has a method 'eatTaquitos' which isn't yet tested in my existing test suite. ZenTest will detect that and create a stub 'test\_eatTaquitos' (or some other, probably better, name) method. It's a stub because ZenTest isn't smart enought to know \*how\* to test 'eatTaquitos', just that it still \*needs\* to be tested. Does that clear up the confusion? (Or, if I'm totally off base, will someone familiar with ZenTest clean up the mess I just made?) Jacob Fugal ---
**Author:** ![Guest15](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6de8d8/32.png) [@Guest15](https://rubytalk.org/u/Guest15)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 18:40 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/14 "2005-05-24T18:40:19Z")
> \>\> (sorry, you need to sign in (free account) to read it). > \> > \> I generally am opposed to registering for free content (paid stuff > \> is obviously different). One may visit [http://www.bugmenot.com](http://www.bugmenot.com) to > \> bypass registration. > > bless you. seconded. > **···** > > On 5/24/05, Ara.T.Howard \ wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 May 2005, ES wrote: > > \> Le 24/5/2005, "pat eyler" \ a écrit: > > > # -a -- > > > > # \> email :: ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov \> phone :: 303.497.6469 \> My religion is very simple. My religion is kindness. \> --Tenzin Gyatso > > -- > thanks, > -pate > ------------------------- > We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because > they want to know something else, and would therefore only > misunderstand what we said > - the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith) ---
**Author:** ![gabriele\_renzi5](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e79b87/32.png) [@gabriele\_renzi5](https://rubytalk.org/u/gabriele_renzi5)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 21:00 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/15 "2005-05-24T21:00:18Z")
pat eyler ha scritto: > > I think it is a nice article. > > OTOH I'd have loved to see some information on how to test this for > > network problems, since a friend of mine just had this kind of problems: > > how to be sure that my code won't bomb down if the dns goes mad or the > > network interface breaks or whatever? But probably this is out of the > > scope of the article. > > Yeah, out of scope for this one, but it sounds like an interesting problem to write about. I think mock objects are the right answer. I'm waiting for it 🙂 > > Also, why are you putting the mock data in the DATA pseudofile instead > > of a real external file ? > > For a small amount of data, using the DATA pseudofile was easier (keeping everything together), but as r43 has grown, I'm getting ready to split it out into a separate file. I see, thanks for the answer > **···** > > > On 5/24/05, gabriele renzi \ wrote: ---
**Author:** ![Brian\_Schroder1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2bfe46/32.png) [@Brian\_Schroder1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Brian_Schroder1)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 21:48 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/16 "2005-05-24T21:48:07Z")
I understand your motivation, but I think it is showing something that I would rate as ugly ruby code to the world. If you really want a string, you could have used to\_str. Please don't feel offended. I'm not even maintaining a library and have until now never managed to really develop something test first, let alone write an article and get it published. I feel that ugly maybe is a bit too strong a word, but I can't find anything more subtle. I think it is important to show good ruby style in articles, and ducktyping is one part of good style. best regards, Brian Schröder > **···** > > On 24/05/05, pat eyler \ wrote: > > > On 5/24/05, Brian Schröder \ wrote: > > \> Just started with your article, and I wonder why you build a > > \> constructor that tests for object classes, why not simply call .to\_s > > \> on the argument? > > > > I wrote it that way to create some (artificial, but easy to see) > > boundary conditions for the article, this test doesn't actually > > show up in the released versions of r43. It would have been > > better to be able to verify the format of the id strings, but I > > wasn't able to find that kind of information about them. > > > > Actually testing it the way I did was a bit of a stretch. In the case > > of the test key '1234' you could have a Numeric, but the real keys > > all seem to be alphanumeric. It's certainly possible to create an > > Array that would be stringified into a valid key as well, e.g. > > ["1", "2", "3", "4"]. > > -- > [http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/](http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/) > > Stringed instrument chords: [http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/](http://chordlist.brian-schroeder.de/) ---
**Author:** ![James\_Britt4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a3d4f5/32.png) [@James\_Britt4](https://rubytalk.org/u/James_Britt4)\ **Post date:** [24 May 2005 21:49 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/17 "2005-05-24T21:49:49Z")
pat eyler wrote: > > Just started with your article, and I wonder why you build a > > constructor that tests for object classes, why not simply call .to\_s > > on the argument? > > I wrote it that way to create some (artificial, but easy to see) boundary conditions for the article, this test doesn't actually show up in the released versions of r43. It would have been > better to be able to verify the format of the id strings, but I > wasn't able to find that kind of information about them. My own experience in writing abut Ruby, especially in the common case where the audience is largely unfamiliar with Ruby, is that practices and procedures tend to get a bit skewed for reason of discourse. Code is often not as compact is a it might otherwise be because that tends to require more background explanation. It's also hard to create good demo cases, to find the balance between a compelling problem and a 7-page discussion limit. Has anybody collected tips and guidelines for writing about Ruby? It would be good to see more Ruby articles in high profile places (i.e. sites outside the Ruby community circle, or in widely-circulated magazines such as Linux Journal), but I wonder if people with good ideas and useful knowledge hold off because they don't know where to start or how to construct a well-organized, (reasonably) self-contained article. James Britt > **···** > > > On 5/24/05, Brian Schröder \ wrote: ---
**Author:** ![Jacob\_Fugal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@Jacob\_Fugal](https://rubytalk.org/u/Jacob_Fugal)\ **Post date:** [7 June 2005 22:38 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/18 "2005-06-07T22:38:34Z")
/me looks at pate's reply and winces, realizing he guessed wrong. I retract my previous post... ☹ Jacob Fugal ---
**Author:** ![Ghislain\_MARY](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@Ghislain\_MARY](https://rubytalk.org/u/Ghislain_MARY)\ **Post date:** [7 June 2005 22:39 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/19 "2005-06-07T22:39:46Z")
pat eyler a écrit : > I did, perhaps it didn't show up very well: > > Letting ZenTest write code stubs for you works the same way. If you were to run the tool against your existing ts\_r43.rb like 'ZenTest.rb ts\_r43.rb', it would generate the output shown here: > > 1 class R43 > > 2 def key > 3 raise NotImplementedError, 'Need to write key' > 4 end > > 5 def echo > 6 raise NotImplementedError, 'Need to write echo' > 7 end > > 8 end >      Since all that ZenTest is writing for you are code stubs (which look > a \*lot\* like test stubs) I probably need to be more explicit about what's > going on. Oh... sorry. That's my mistake. It is indeed very clear. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Guest15](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6de8d8/32.png) [@Guest15](https://rubytalk.org/u/Guest15)\ **Post date:** [7 June 2005 22:44 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601/20 "2005-06-07T22:44:22Z")
> Disclaimer: I've never actually used ZenTest, so I may be wrong, but > having read a little about it this is my understanding... Anti-disclaimer: the description below is pretty accurate for Ruby code -\> tests via ZenTest > \> But I have a question. The article is entitled 'Test-first programming > \> with Ruby' but when talking about ZenTest you tell that it "can also > \> work in reverse, loading a test suite and writing code stubs for every > \> test" which corresponds to what this is all about. However the examples > \> you are showing after that are examples to go from code to tests. Why > \> didn't you show how to go from tests to code using ZenTest? > > I believe that you are misinterpreting the (admittedly ambiguous) > statement "loading a test suite and writing code stubs for every > test". From my understanding of ZenTest, the noun "test suite" would > refer to the code base to be tested plus any existing tests, and the > "code stubs" are stubs for new tests, not stubs for the code being > tested. E.g. my code has a method 'eatTaquitos' which isn't yet tested > in my existing test suite. ZenTest will detect that and create a stub > 'test\_eatTaquitos' (or some other, probably better, name) method. It's > a stub because ZenTest isn't smart enought to know \*how\* to test > 'eatTaquitos', just that it still \*needs\* to be tested. > > Does that clear up the confusion? (Or, if I'm totally off base, will > someone familiar with ZenTest clean up the mess I just made?) ZenTest is capable of 'working in reverse' too though. If you've written a nice test suite but haven't gotten around to writing code yet, ZenTest will gleefully write stubs for the code. In fact, you could hand ZenTest a file full of tests and a file full of code, and it will pump out test method stubs for any untested methods and methods stubs to match any tests for which no methods currently exist. (Have I successfully undisambiguated things?) > **···** > > On 6/7/05, Jacob Fugal \ wrote: > > > Jacob Fugal > > -- > thanks, > -pate > ------------------------- > We are often unable to tell people what they need to know, because > they want to know something else, and would therefore only > misunderstand what we said > - the Raven (George MacDonald, Lilith) [Next page](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-article/18601.md?page=2)