Here are two interesting slide shows from ThoughtWorks that closely relates to what I wrote regarding executable acceptance tests (stories) some time ago:
Acceptance Test Driven Development (ATDD)
Acceptance Testing vs. Unit Testing: A Developer’s Perspective
I think these two resources make a good theoretical starting point for the "Why ATDD?" question.
Don't just look at the slides as slide shows, since there's a lot of great stuff in the comments.
2009-11-24
2009-11-21
2009-11-02
“Programming as you know it just died”
The above was stated by Juval Löwy during today’s workshop at øredev entitled “Service-Orientation, WCF, and You”.
Just like every .Net class conceptually is a COM-object, Juval argued that with the challenges we as biz app architects/developers face today, every (.Net) class should be a (WCF) service.
The main reason is that basically all complex plumbing such as security, concurrency, logging, fault tolerance, and so forth is given to you for free.
The learning curve is however mammoth, and is best compared with going from procedural to object-oriented programming.
When interpreting all the signs from MS, Intel, and others, Juval means that it is clear that service-orientation is the next paradigm shift that will replace .Net.
The analogy is ATL, which made it it easy to follow the good practice of making your C++ class a COM one. Then .Net came along were this wasn’t framework-based. Now we have WCF making it possible to make every .Net class a service by utilizing a framework.
The financial figures also indicates this being the main focus of MS. Juval claims that the cost of WCF is some 150% of what went into the CLR.
All in all, this was an extremely mind-exercising day that left me with the feeling of seeing the world of programming with a new pair of eyes from now on.
I guess I’ll have to read Juval’s WCF book when the 3rd edition is out… ;-)
UPDATE Feb 11 2010:
1. There's a recent DotNetRocks show with Juval, where he explains all of this.
2. There's now a "rough cut" edition of the book available.
Just like every .Net class conceptually is a COM-object, Juval argued that with the challenges we as biz app architects/developers face today, every (.Net) class should be a (WCF) service.
The main reason is that basically all complex plumbing such as security, concurrency, logging, fault tolerance, and so forth is given to you for free.
The learning curve is however mammoth, and is best compared with going from procedural to object-oriented programming.
When interpreting all the signs from MS, Intel, and others, Juval means that it is clear that service-orientation is the next paradigm shift that will replace .Net.
The analogy is ATL, which made it it easy to follow the good practice of making your C++ class a COM one. Then .Net came along were this wasn’t framework-based. Now we have WCF making it possible to make every .Net class a service by utilizing a framework.
The financial figures also indicates this being the main focus of MS. Juval claims that the cost of WCF is some 150% of what went into the CLR.
All in all, this was an extremely mind-exercising day that left me with the feeling of seeing the world of programming with a new pair of eyes from now on.
I guess I’ll have to read Juval’s WCF book when the 3rd edition is out… ;-)
UPDATE Feb 11 2010:
1. There's a recent DotNetRocks show with Juval, where he explains all of this.
2. There's now a "rough cut" edition of the book available.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
