BDD isn't a replacement for decent testing at all. We use the scenarios to facilitate conversation, to ensure that the software we're writing is software that matters. Sometimes those scenarios can help the invaluable, irreplaceable QAs (but I've done them manually before, in the absence of a decent automation tool).
We also identify stakeholders, rather than just users. If long-term stability, performance or security is important, there's probably a stakeholder who can define what that means, and how to tell if you've achieved it; they'd be the people we had that conversation with. Captchas are the example I use most frequently - users don't want them and won't care if they produce false positives.
-- Liz.
In reply to Re^2: Behavior Driven Development: suggested tools for perl?
by Anonymous Monk
in thread Behavior Driven Development: suggested tools for perl?
by blogical
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |