Quack-Driven Development is a Waterfowl Methodology for Programmers

medium.com

2 pointskranzky3 comments

I wrote this after the "Is TDD Dead?" debate of a few months ago, and I think it's high time I published and shared. Comments most welcome!

I'm not a fan of TDD either, but I am a practitioner of what I've dubbed "Maintenance Driven Development" which I've blogged about here: http://taylodl.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/maintenance-driven-d...

Bottom line: I prefer writing as few tests as possible to ensure the quality of the code and Maintenance Driven Development is a practical method for achieving that.

Yes, the TDD debate really got me thinking about why I write tests. It used to be about saving me time. Now it seems to be about satisfying other people that I know what I'm doing.

But I am a fan of code-as-documentation, blindingly obvious business logic and data validations at the interface, and I was struck by how Uncle Bob's TDD example just disregards all of that. Hence the QDD piece (which is half serious, half joking; I've left it a puzzle for the reader to figure out which half is which).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com