it is true, I almost all the time cancel that dialog to put the method as not yet categorized... but sometimes I select the category... I think that pressing ESC or cancel is not that bad in this case and I would keep this dialog.

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Niko Schwarz <niko.schwarz@googlemail.com> wrote:
I think the rationale must be: during TDD it's ok to ask the developer
questions that he can answer right away. Thus, it's ok that the create
button asks for the class: you know instantly what to answer. But
asking for the method category is a major pain. I don't know about
y'all, but I never quite know upfront how I'll structure my
categories. That emerges much later in the process.

In short: remove the asking for the method category. Just put it in
'not yet categorized', and have me figure it out later.

Cheers,

Niko

2010/6/2 Germ�n Leiva <leivagerman@gmail.com>:
> I'm thinking out load here ...
> In the debugger when a DNU is raised, for speeding up the programming in
> "TDD mode":
>
> The create button must add the method in the class of the receiver, the
> possibility to choose a superclass of the receiver must be optional (I don't
> like the recurrent asking...) in other button for example or having
> different shortcuts from the keyboard
> If I send a message that I already know that will be a getter, some option
> like "Create getter"�could�automagically�create the method and the instance
> variable.
> When we a accept a method for the first time the pop-ups saying "Unkown
> selector please confirm, select or cancel" are really annoying and decrease
> coding speed
> Same for the category pop-ups
> In the creation of a new class through "define new class" it will be helpful
> to remember the last class category used
>
> Some ToDo list supported from the environment and some facility for the
> creation of test.
> All of the above maybe just make sense in TDD mode or not =P
> Cheers
> 2010/6/2 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@inria.fr>
>>
>> The problems that I would like to see Pharo address are:
>> �- redundancies in unit tests
>> �- coverage of tests
>> �- classification of low and high levels of tests (implementation tests vs
>> user stories)
>>
>> What are the tools to identify and solve this issues ? Research is needed
>> :-)
>>
>> Alexandre
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2 Jun 2010, at 15:30, St�phane Ducasse wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all
>> >
>> > Imagine that we would like to sell pharo (+ seaside) as THE agile
>> > platform for doing TDD.
>> > What would be the changes that we could do support it.
>> > I know that hernan did a package for that but not I would like to have a
>> > new list of items
>> > to support it.
>> >
>> > Stef
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Pharo-project mailing list
>> > Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
>> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
>
>
> --
> Germ�n Leiva
> LeivaGerman@gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>



--
http://scg.unibe.ch/staff/Schwarz
twitter.com/nes1983
Tel: +41 076 235 8683

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project