What I liked:
- context of GOOS and TDD
- interactif walking skeleton
- practical examples are nice
- use of Ruby and RSpec
- practical applicability
- smoothness of the coding kata
- live demo project -> even a coding-newbie understands!
- no buzzwords or trends, functional and systems approach to what you test and xxxx
- live demo
- goed duidelijk GOOS uitgelegd
- great session, a lot of information (to learn)
- worked example
- well prepared (UI mockup, diagrams etc)
- having a reference (the book)
- the 3 layers test/apprunner/testDriver
- the demo!
- explained concepts very well
- good balance of theory + demonstration
- great session on how to write your simple UI test for web apps (really great)
- nice case and live programming
- convincing demonstration
- session format
- nice example
- sharing of experiences
- working code
- knowledge of the tools used
- the topic
- content is good
- interactive
- examples
- interesting approach
- great 30s presetnation
- great beginning (3 styles of TDD) -> GOOS
- practical insights
- live coding + ruby
- give me the will to re-read GOOS
- explanations backed up by a successful handson coding session
- well prepared
- theory cleanly explained
- coded something working
- concept nice
- kata
- xxx interoduction + kata
To make it perfect:
- the examples may be presented a bit faster
- framework for swing application
- what about backend-focused dev. usually xxxx other party builds a frontend. -> how to keep your xxx happy?
- borelnootjes en bier ;-)
- a little bit easier code sample, it was really fast
- less time on explaining styles
- clarify crucial concept (walking skeleton) early on
- focus example on concept of working skeleton
- better colors to be able to see the blue/purple (maybe best on a white background)
- keep the naming in the code exactly in lin with the overview (auction-driver=test-driver)
- a solution for swing applications!!
- interactive part (but of course maybe not possible because of time limit)
- introduction shorter
- give an overview of good practices and experience
- go a little further to demonstrate the whole end-to-end chain
- need more time again!
- consider more complex real life cases
- make code more readable
- speak both in small turns, to make it more living
- post-it too little (unable to read from the end of the room)
- choose a != example than from the booko
- (sorry for falling asleep: too tired)
- make a != between stubbing and mocking and faking (see xUnitPatterns)
- example too simple tov real C++/C# appl
- kata: less time on tdd (alread known) to focus more on the outside in approach, on the GUI-specific TDD (e.g. classes could have been written before). Example fo how product owners can write the GUI acceptance tests (tooling like selenium...)
|