New answers tagged

0

I don't try to differentiate between BDD and TDD and believe that they are both about the following: small change constant feedback continual improvement improved communication and they led to the following benefits: useful functionality based on real needs rapid change for features as needed less artifacts quick turnaround for bug fixing


2

BDD Tests As many things around us - there is more hype around BDD than what it deserves. BDD was born as a way of naming your tests clearer: instead of saying that you test this-and-that you're saying it-should-work-this-and-that. And this is a great idea since it makes it clear about the purpose of the test and it allows the test to be shared with not-so-...


2

You probably have read that BDD is not about testing, but about improving communication. In software development, there are a manifold of ways to express the same thing; and some fit better for each role. Given that, it is common for a project to have many documents expressing the same thing. This cause two problems: When requirements change, all these ...


0

Let's separate out BDD and feature coverage. BDD is just a way to name your tests. And we can cover features irrespectively of the test names. So the question boils down to "how do we measure feature coverage". Here is one of the ways: Use reporting tool that allows linking your tests to the requirements (e.g. Allure). Actually link your tests. In Java + ...


1

Let me answer your queries in a different way i.e. not by looking at the number of testers and developers and how to utilise them during the initial phases of development cycle. TDD and TFD tries to emphasise on a very important aspect of SDLC which in the long term helps in reducing testing costs and helps to launch a product on time if not sooner. ...



Top 50 recent answers are included