Well, I'm not sure what my expectations for this tutorial were but they weren't met I guess.
I feel I got more from reading _Perl Testing: A Developer's Notebook_.
To be fair to Josh he is going through a lot of matter in a shorter amount of time than it was designed for (6 hours vs. 3 hours).
A lot of people left the tutorial prior to the first break.
UPDATE:
In reflection I think my expectations weren't aligned with what the talk was. It seems to be starting from the beginning and building on that.
I think _Perl Testing_ basically covered the stuff Josh covered. So, I still think it was worthwhile to see what the current, optimal way to do testing in Perl. I just wanted more.
That and all the cool kids went to the Django tutorial. ;-)
So I, like others, left at the break.
Re:Description was misleading
gizmo_mathboy on 2008-07-22T05:45:06
That would have been a good talk, too.
I guess I wanted a discussion of how one would structure TDD. The examples might be in Perl but the framework would still be universal. That might not be doable given how Perl does testing vs. Java/C/etc.
Ovid/chromatic/etc. have really got me thinking about testing as part of the development cycle, at least how integrated they talk about it being.
The talk for me just didn't advance my understanding and knowledge that much.
Oh well, at least I should be able to give Josh some feedback.
