Re: Unit tests and parameter validation
Eb <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.programming.test-driven-development |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CANEY99YsnNLm=y0x_7QiC5UecLtrTviprDwt_dsREtKdmiCwGg@mail.gmail.com> |
Ok. But I've experienced that developing outside in also. On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Matteo Vaccari <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > > > > Simply because you are assuming, as you develop your "inside" objects, > that they will provide the right services to the "outside" objects that you > will develop later. They might, or they might not, in which case you'll > have to do some rework. > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Eb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> How so? >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Michal Svoboda <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> ** >>> >>> >>> Eb wrote: >>> > Curious how if this changes if one develops inside out. >>> >>> Your probability increases that you develop the wrong thing. :) >>> >>> On the original point, if your guards are mostly about null, then you >>> can annotate your stuff with @Nonnull (or similar if your language >>> supports it). This then makes the contract more like a strong type >>> system and violations can be likely caught by static analysis tools. >>> >>> Michal >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> blog: http://eikonne.wordpress.com >> twitter: @eikonne >> >> >> > > -- blog: http://eikonne.wordpress.com twitter: @eikonne