From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,fc52c633190162e0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!grolier!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: why learn C?
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <1172144043.746296.44680@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
 <slrnetr31o.875.Marc.Boyer@localhost.localdomain>
 <1172161751.573558.24140@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
 <slrnetri6j.875.Marc.Boyer@localhost.localdomain>
 <546qkhF1tr7dtU1@mid.individual.net>
 <slrnett8ph.807.Marc.Boyer@localhost.localdomain>
 <5ZULh.48$YL5.40@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <etqp42$4g6$1@cernne03.cern.ch>
 <4eeMh.16400$bb1.2557@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 21:09:39 +0100
Message-ID: <lhft0tgl1omr.4xbmnu1ieoi1$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Mar 2007 21:09:30 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2ff0d922.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=DQoO9]33JfY@>[RYkFXOIPMcF=Q^Z^V3X4Fo<]lROoRQFl8W>\BH3YRle=RdK?]1F[DNcfSJ;bb[UIRnRBaCd<M^gbYn1i46>XRAF6l4;U=XA[
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14577
Date: 2007-03-21T21:09:30+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:48:45 -0800, adaworks@sbcglobal.net wrote:

> "Maciej Sobczak" <no.spam@no.spam.com> wrote in message 
> news:etqp42$4g6$1@cernne03.cern.ch...

>> Not necessarily. The advocates of test-driven development (TDD for short) 
>> openly say good bye to debuggers, at least in blogs.
>>
> I am quite aware of TDD.  I am not a fan.   While many of the claims of
> the TDD advocates have some virtue, it is a fact that not all errors in a
> program can be detected through testing.   Further, as Dijkstra notes, "We
> can test for the presence of errors, but not for their absence."

I don't think that this is the main weakness of "spinal driven" design. A
more fundamental problem I see in TDD, is that it does not define what is
the goal to achieve [by means of programming]. Dijkstra's critique presumes
existence of some stated correct program behavior. But TDD does not have
it. The target is moving, and all but visible. That is supposed to be a
strength of the approach. But as a consequence the very word "correct"
looses any meaning. Does TDD converge? If it does, what are the properties
of what it would to? What about metrics? etc. In short, I don't trust in
"tests as specifications."

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de