Ian Collins wrote:

>> Where we
>> disagree is that you seem to consider the unit tests a form of
>> being "written down", whereas I consider them code, just like
>> the rest---I don't know how to write a unit test until I have
>> some idea what is to be tested, i.e. what the unit shoud do.
>> And IMHO, I don't know that until it is written down.
>>
> Not really, the written down will be some form of requirement, be that a
> clause in a traditional requirements specification, or an XP style user
> story. Given a requirement, my view of TDD is that it's another form of
> functional decomposition. You know what your end gaol is, you know the
> steps to take you there and you follow them. The smaller those steps,
> the better.

You American you!! You are just not smart enough to think of all your class
details outside of code, where they are safe from the icky details of
implementation, best left to servants!

You just want to leap into coding, without being rigorous enough to prove you
can code it all in your head first, like me!

--
Phlip