<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Crafting software&#187; Testing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://davidlaing.com/category/agile/testing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://davidlaing.com</link>
	<description>David Laing&#039;s thoughts on software development</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 11:02:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Fitnesse Smell &#8211; Executable Requirements that look like Scripts</title>
		<link>http://davidlaing.com/2010/06/16/fitnesse-smell-executable-requirements-that-look-like-scripts/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=fitnesse-smell-executable-requirements-that-look-like-scripts</link>
		<comments>http://davidlaing.com/2010/06/16/fitnesse-smell-executable-requirements-that-look-like-scripts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 14:11:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mrdavidlaing</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Code smells]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[acceptance tests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[codesmell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fitnesse]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davidlaing.com/?p=232</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gojko (who wrote the Fitnesse book) has this interesting discussion on what makes a good acceptance test in Fitnesse. http://gojko.net/2010/06/16/anatomy-of-a-good-acceptance-test/ His point seems to be that Fitnesse is a good tool for documenting specifications, and continuously automating their validation. When your Fitnesse tests become like &#8220;scripts&#8221; (which is how developers are trained to see the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://gojko.net">Gojko</a> (who wrote the <a href="http://gojko.net/2009/12/07/fitnesse-book-now-free-online/">Fitnesse book</a>) has this interesting discussion on what makes a good acceptance test in Fitnesse.</p>
<p><a href="http://gojko.net/2010/06/16/anatomy-of-a-good-acceptance-test/">http://gojko.net/2010/06/16/anatomy-of-a-good-acceptance-test/</a></p>
<p>His point seems to be that Fitnesse is a good tool for documenting specifications, and continuously automating their validation.  When your Fitnesse tests become like &#8220;scripts&#8221; (which is how developers are trained to see the world), then Fitnesse is a pretty crummy test execution environment (just use a unit test runner!)</p>
<p>Interesting that alternate tools &#8211; http://www.concordion.org, http://wiki.github.com/aslakhellesoy/cucumber/, http://www.specflow.org/ have arisen that effectively try to limit the power of the &#8220;test description language&#8221; to prevent the acceptance tests becoming script like.</p>
<p>Interesting food for thought &#8211; I know that many of my Fitnesse tests exhibit this codesmell</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://davidlaing.com/2010/06/16/fitnesse-smell-executable-requirements-that-look-like-scripts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

