We name objects, we name variables, we name classes, messages, functions and types. We name all the time because names allow us not only to reference “something” but also to understand what that “something” means.
The answer is: of course not!!, but now that I got your attention surely due to the title that mimics the lately hot "Is TDD Dead?" discussion started by @dhh, I
Hace unos años atrás cuando nos juntamos para formar 10Pines teníamos muchas dudas sobre lo que pasaría, sobre cómo nos iría, sobre la factibilidad de hacerlo, dudas lógicas de cualquier emprendimiento y cambio.
One of the things that makes TDD difficult to apply on existing code (or just “legacy code”) is the dependencies that the object subject to test may have. The more “dependencies” the object
Today we all know now that variables should not be called x or y, not even i nor n, when we use the famous “for”... but do you really know why? have you
One of the recurrent problems I see when teaching OO design is the “names” used by the programmers to name classes, methods, etc.
OOSCM (Object Oriented Software Configuration Management) is a tool we are developing to better support traits that are unique to object oriented development. Current SCM tools (CVS,SVN,GIT,Monticello, etc) are file
Patagonia is a conference registration web based system written in Pharo using Seaside, whose main purpose is to fulfill the ESUG conference registration needs. It was developed at 10Pines under the sponsorship of
During the 70s, mutation testing emerged as a technique to assess the fault-finding effectiveness of a test suite. It works by mutating objects behavior and looking for tests to “kill” those mutants. The
When talking about Smalltalk, there is definitively an over use on the possibility to add messages to Object class. It is so easy to do it, that people usually do it just to