we are glad to invite you to the next regular session of the Softwerkskammer Munich. Here we can discuss and try out new ideas and learn all together. Traditionally we have some time to discuss, some time to write code and something to eat and to drink.
You can vote which topic we take: recently we started to collect suggestions on page https://www.softwerkskammer.org/wiki/muenchen/themen-und-moderatoren (in English and German). If you can suggest a topic for the follow up meet, please add it to the wiki page!
* Classicist vs. Mockist TDD
* Micado Method
* Mob - programming
Your decision: Classicist vs. Mockist TDD
TDD is not like TDD: the "London School of TDD" ("Mockists"), first of all Steve Freeman and Nat Pryce, rely on top-down approach to develop the adjacent objects from the outside ("outside-in ") and to drive the design through the acceptance tests. Interactions among the objects come in the foreground and can be unit tested in isolation using mocks. Contrary, the "Chicago School of TDD" ("Classicists") with representatives such as Kent Beck or Uncle Bob tries to get rid of mocks whenever possible. Not the interactions but "state based testing" and checking of return values are in their focus.
Let's look at what makes both approaches and especially find out which one is better suited for the problems. And, as always, we want to solve a kata with both approaches and compare our experiences.
* Blog Post Martin Fowler "Mocks are not Stubs": http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html
* Paper by Freeman et al. "Mock Roles not objects" http://jmock.org/oopsla2004.pdf
* Book by Steve Freeman & Nat Pryce "Growing Object Oriented Software Guided by tests": http://www.growing-object-oriented-software.com/
Looking forward to see you,