Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy



Michael Feathers wrote:
> krasicki wrote:
> >
> > Michael Feathers wrote:
> >
> >>krasicki wrote:
> >>
> >>>XP was not promoting testing years ago. XP retreated to testing
> >>>emphasis because few people argue that it's good. But testing advocacy
> >>>doesn't validate XP as a good methodology per se.
> >>
> >>Nope. Testing was a core practice of XP from the beginning. It was it
> >>the white book, as test-first and functional testing. If you go to Ron
> >>Jeffries' site you'll find the original writeups of the C3 project's
> >>practices:
> >>
> >>http://xprogramming.com/Practices/xpractices.htm
> >>
> >>And, if I remember correctly, the paper submitted to OOPSLA by C3 in the
> >>late 90s, the one that spurned interest in XP, emphasized testing as well.
> >>
> >>Where are you getting all of these odd ideas?
> >
> >
> > Memories of previous trips around this bush.
> >
>
> You're not learning much on each pass, are you?
>
Funny you should say that. I'm standing here off to the side reading
the same responses from the exact same handful of people as many years
ago.

Keep patting each other on the back.

.