Test Driven Development Roman Numerals phpUnit-testing a controller in Ruby on RailsTest Driven Development, Mocking & Unit-testingUnit testing event triggeringCalculate the physical centreSchedule class (exercise for test driven development)Karate Chop KataTDD - Kata - String CalculatorTest Driven Development with DjangoPython Calculator Test Driven DevelopmentFizz Buzz Test Driven Development

How should I ask for a "pint" in countries that use metric?

Findminimum of Integral

Was it ever illegal to name a pig "Napoleon" in France?

Why do airports remove/realign runways?

Computer name naming convention for security

What was the nature of the known bugs in the Space Shuttle software?

How to slice a string input at a certain unknown index

How was the website able to tell my credit card was wrong before it processed it?

Can Jimmy hang on his rope?

Is homosexuality or bisexuality allowed for women?

What does the multimeter dial do internally?

Writing an ace/aro character?

Draw a diagram with rectangles

Can the word "desk" be used as a verb?

What kind of Chinook helicopter/airplane hybrid is this?

What exactly is a "murder hobo"?

Array or vector? Two dimensional array or matrix?

What do you call a situation where you have choices but no good choice?

Why am I getting unevenly-spread results when using $RANDOM?

Moving millions of files to a different directory with specfic name patterns

Is it possible for a character at any level to cast all 44 Cantrips in one week without Magic Items?

Why do people prefer metropolitan areas, considering monsters and villains?

How do ballistic trajectories work in a ring world?

How can I use my cell phone's light as a reading light?



Test Driven Development Roman Numerals php


Unit-testing a controller in Ruby on RailsTest Driven Development, Mocking & Unit-testingUnit testing event triggeringCalculate the physical centreSchedule class (exercise for test driven development)Karate Chop KataTDD - Kata - String CalculatorTest Driven Development with DjangoPython Calculator Test Driven DevelopmentFizz Buzz Test Driven Development






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








1












$begingroup$


I just learned about Test Driven Development on a podcast yesterday. So I decided to try it out today by writing a roman numerals to integer converter (per their suggestion). I've never written Unit Tests before today.



My process



I wrote the test class with the runAll() function, then I started writing my tests one at a time, from top to bottom, if you look at the RomanTest class below.



Between each chunk, I significantly changed the intVal() method of RMC.

- testI through testM, I merely checked hard-coded values in an array

- testII through testXVII, I looped over all the chars and added values together

- testIV through testIIX required a conditional modification to intVal()

- testXXXIX (to the end) took a complete rewrite of intVal() leading to the code posted below



Before writing the next test, I always confirmed the previous test was passing. Except, I wrote testL-testM all at once as those were VERY simple after getting testI-textX working.



At points, when re-writing intVal, my older tests broke. Then I would get all my tests passing again before continuing to the next test.



I never altered any previous tests when trying to get the new tests passing.



My questions:



1.) Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?

2.) Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?

3.) Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke? (considering I got them all passing again before moving to the next test)



I am asking for a review of my TDD code & process.



class RomanTest 


public function runAll()
echo '<pre>'."n";
$methods = get_class_methods($this);
foreach ($methods as $method)
if ($method=='runAll')continue;
$mo = $method;
while (strlen($mo)<15)
$mo .='-';

echo "<b>$mo:</b> ";
echo $this->$method() ? 'true' : 'false';
echo "<br>n";

echo "n</pre>";



public function testI()
$rmc = new RMC("I");
if ($rmc->intVal()===1)
return TRUE;

return FALSE;


public function testV()
$rmc = new RMC("V");
if ($rmc->intVal()===5)
return TRUE;

return FALSE;

public function testX()
$rmc = new RMC("X");
if ($rmc->intVal()===10)return TRUE;
else return FALSE;

public function testL()
$rmc = new RMC("L");
if ($rmc->intVal()===50)return TRUE;
return FALSE;

public function testC()
$rmc = new RMC("C");
if ($rmc->intVal()===100)return TRUE;
return FALSE;

public function testD()
$rmc = new RMC("D");
if ($rmc->intVal()===500)return TRUE;
return FALSE;

public function testM()
$rmc = new RMC("M");
if ($rmc->intVal()===1000)return TRUE;
return FALSE;






public function testII()
$rmc = new RMC("II");
if ($rmc->intVal()===2)return TRUE;
return FALSE;

public function testIII()
$rmc = new RMC("III");
if ($rmc->intVal()===3)return TRUE;
return FALSE;

public function testVI()
$rmc = new RMC("VI");
if ($rmc->intVal()===6)return TRUE;
return FALSE;

public function testVII()
$rmc = new RMC("VII");
if ($rmc->intVal()===7)return TRUE;
return FALSE;

public function testXVII()
$rmc = new RMC("XVII");
if ($rmc->intVal()===17)return TRUE;
return FALSE;







public function testIV()
$rmc = new RMC("IV");
return ($rmc->intVal()===4);

public function testIIV()
$rmc = new RMC("IIV");
return ($rmc->intVal()===3);

public function testIIX()
$rmc = new RMC("IIX");
return ($rmc->intVal()===8);




public function testXXXIX()
$rmc = new RMC("XXXIX");
return ($rmc->intVal()===39);

public function testXXXIIX()
$rmc = new RMC("XXXIIX");
return ($rmc->intVal()===38);


public function testMMMCMXCIX()
return (new RMC("MMMCMXCIX"))->intVal()===3999;

public function testMLXVI()
return (new RMC("MLXVI"))->intVal()===1066;





class RMC 

private $numerals;

private $vals = [
'I' => 1,
'V' => 5,
'X' => 10,
'L' => 50,
'C' => 100,
'D' => 500,
'M' => 1000,

];

public function __construct($numerals)
$this->numerals = $numerals;


public function intVal()
$tot = 0;
$lastTot = 0;
$lastVal = 0;
foreach (array_reverse(str_split($this->numerals)) as $nml)
$value = $this->vals[$nml];
if ($lastVal<=$value)
$tot +=$value;
$lastVal = $value;
else if ($lastVal>$value)
$tot -= $value;


$lastTot = $tot;

return $tot;




And to run it:



$test = new RomanTest();
$test->runAll();









share|improve this question









$endgroup$


















    1












    $begingroup$


    I just learned about Test Driven Development on a podcast yesterday. So I decided to try it out today by writing a roman numerals to integer converter (per their suggestion). I've never written Unit Tests before today.



    My process



    I wrote the test class with the runAll() function, then I started writing my tests one at a time, from top to bottom, if you look at the RomanTest class below.



    Between each chunk, I significantly changed the intVal() method of RMC.

    - testI through testM, I merely checked hard-coded values in an array

    - testII through testXVII, I looped over all the chars and added values together

    - testIV through testIIX required a conditional modification to intVal()

    - testXXXIX (to the end) took a complete rewrite of intVal() leading to the code posted below



    Before writing the next test, I always confirmed the previous test was passing. Except, I wrote testL-testM all at once as those were VERY simple after getting testI-textX working.



    At points, when re-writing intVal, my older tests broke. Then I would get all my tests passing again before continuing to the next test.



    I never altered any previous tests when trying to get the new tests passing.



    My questions:



    1.) Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?

    2.) Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?

    3.) Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke? (considering I got them all passing again before moving to the next test)



    I am asking for a review of my TDD code & process.



    class RomanTest 


    public function runAll()
    echo '<pre>'."n";
    $methods = get_class_methods($this);
    foreach ($methods as $method)
    if ($method=='runAll')continue;
    $mo = $method;
    while (strlen($mo)<15)
    $mo .='-';

    echo "<b>$mo:</b> ";
    echo $this->$method() ? 'true' : 'false';
    echo "<br>n";

    echo "n</pre>";



    public function testI()
    $rmc = new RMC("I");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===1)
    return TRUE;

    return FALSE;


    public function testV()
    $rmc = new RMC("V");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===5)
    return TRUE;

    return FALSE;

    public function testX()
    $rmc = new RMC("X");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===10)return TRUE;
    else return FALSE;

    public function testL()
    $rmc = new RMC("L");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===50)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;

    public function testC()
    $rmc = new RMC("C");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===100)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;

    public function testD()
    $rmc = new RMC("D");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===500)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;

    public function testM()
    $rmc = new RMC("M");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===1000)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;






    public function testII()
    $rmc = new RMC("II");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===2)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;

    public function testIII()
    $rmc = new RMC("III");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===3)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;

    public function testVI()
    $rmc = new RMC("VI");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===6)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;

    public function testVII()
    $rmc = new RMC("VII");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===7)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;

    public function testXVII()
    $rmc = new RMC("XVII");
    if ($rmc->intVal()===17)return TRUE;
    return FALSE;







    public function testIV()
    $rmc = new RMC("IV");
    return ($rmc->intVal()===4);

    public function testIIV()
    $rmc = new RMC("IIV");
    return ($rmc->intVal()===3);

    public function testIIX()
    $rmc = new RMC("IIX");
    return ($rmc->intVal()===8);




    public function testXXXIX()
    $rmc = new RMC("XXXIX");
    return ($rmc->intVal()===39);

    public function testXXXIIX()
    $rmc = new RMC("XXXIIX");
    return ($rmc->intVal()===38);


    public function testMMMCMXCIX()
    return (new RMC("MMMCMXCIX"))->intVal()===3999;

    public function testMLXVI()
    return (new RMC("MLXVI"))->intVal()===1066;





    class RMC 

    private $numerals;

    private $vals = [
    'I' => 1,
    'V' => 5,
    'X' => 10,
    'L' => 50,
    'C' => 100,
    'D' => 500,
    'M' => 1000,

    ];

    public function __construct($numerals)
    $this->numerals = $numerals;


    public function intVal()
    $tot = 0;
    $lastTot = 0;
    $lastVal = 0;
    foreach (array_reverse(str_split($this->numerals)) as $nml)
    $value = $this->vals[$nml];
    if ($lastVal<=$value)
    $tot +=$value;
    $lastVal = $value;
    else if ($lastVal>$value)
    $tot -= $value;


    $lastTot = $tot;

    return $tot;




    And to run it:



    $test = new RomanTest();
    $test->runAll();









    share|improve this question









    $endgroup$














      1












      1








      1


      1



      $begingroup$


      I just learned about Test Driven Development on a podcast yesterday. So I decided to try it out today by writing a roman numerals to integer converter (per their suggestion). I've never written Unit Tests before today.



      My process



      I wrote the test class with the runAll() function, then I started writing my tests one at a time, from top to bottom, if you look at the RomanTest class below.



      Between each chunk, I significantly changed the intVal() method of RMC.

      - testI through testM, I merely checked hard-coded values in an array

      - testII through testXVII, I looped over all the chars and added values together

      - testIV through testIIX required a conditional modification to intVal()

      - testXXXIX (to the end) took a complete rewrite of intVal() leading to the code posted below



      Before writing the next test, I always confirmed the previous test was passing. Except, I wrote testL-testM all at once as those were VERY simple after getting testI-textX working.



      At points, when re-writing intVal, my older tests broke. Then I would get all my tests passing again before continuing to the next test.



      I never altered any previous tests when trying to get the new tests passing.



      My questions:



      1.) Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?

      2.) Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?

      3.) Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke? (considering I got them all passing again before moving to the next test)



      I am asking for a review of my TDD code & process.



      class RomanTest 


      public function runAll()
      echo '<pre>'."n";
      $methods = get_class_methods($this);
      foreach ($methods as $method)
      if ($method=='runAll')continue;
      $mo = $method;
      while (strlen($mo)<15)
      $mo .='-';

      echo "<b>$mo:</b> ";
      echo $this->$method() ? 'true' : 'false';
      echo "<br>n";

      echo "n</pre>";



      public function testI()
      $rmc = new RMC("I");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===1)
      return TRUE;

      return FALSE;


      public function testV()
      $rmc = new RMC("V");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===5)
      return TRUE;

      return FALSE;

      public function testX()
      $rmc = new RMC("X");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===10)return TRUE;
      else return FALSE;

      public function testL()
      $rmc = new RMC("L");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===50)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testC()
      $rmc = new RMC("C");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===100)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testD()
      $rmc = new RMC("D");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===500)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testM()
      $rmc = new RMC("M");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===1000)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;






      public function testII()
      $rmc = new RMC("II");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===2)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testIII()
      $rmc = new RMC("III");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===3)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testVI()
      $rmc = new RMC("VI");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===6)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testVII()
      $rmc = new RMC("VII");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===7)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testXVII()
      $rmc = new RMC("XVII");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===17)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;







      public function testIV()
      $rmc = new RMC("IV");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===4);

      public function testIIV()
      $rmc = new RMC("IIV");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===3);

      public function testIIX()
      $rmc = new RMC("IIX");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===8);




      public function testXXXIX()
      $rmc = new RMC("XXXIX");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===39);

      public function testXXXIIX()
      $rmc = new RMC("XXXIIX");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===38);


      public function testMMMCMXCIX()
      return (new RMC("MMMCMXCIX"))->intVal()===3999;

      public function testMLXVI()
      return (new RMC("MLXVI"))->intVal()===1066;





      class RMC 

      private $numerals;

      private $vals = [
      'I' => 1,
      'V' => 5,
      'X' => 10,
      'L' => 50,
      'C' => 100,
      'D' => 500,
      'M' => 1000,

      ];

      public function __construct($numerals)
      $this->numerals = $numerals;


      public function intVal()
      $tot = 0;
      $lastTot = 0;
      $lastVal = 0;
      foreach (array_reverse(str_split($this->numerals)) as $nml)
      $value = $this->vals[$nml];
      if ($lastVal<=$value)
      $tot +=$value;
      $lastVal = $value;
      else if ($lastVal>$value)
      $tot -= $value;


      $lastTot = $tot;

      return $tot;




      And to run it:



      $test = new RomanTest();
      $test->runAll();









      share|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I just learned about Test Driven Development on a podcast yesterday. So I decided to try it out today by writing a roman numerals to integer converter (per their suggestion). I've never written Unit Tests before today.



      My process



      I wrote the test class with the runAll() function, then I started writing my tests one at a time, from top to bottom, if you look at the RomanTest class below.



      Between each chunk, I significantly changed the intVal() method of RMC.

      - testI through testM, I merely checked hard-coded values in an array

      - testII through testXVII, I looped over all the chars and added values together

      - testIV through testIIX required a conditional modification to intVal()

      - testXXXIX (to the end) took a complete rewrite of intVal() leading to the code posted below



      Before writing the next test, I always confirmed the previous test was passing. Except, I wrote testL-testM all at once as those were VERY simple after getting testI-textX working.



      At points, when re-writing intVal, my older tests broke. Then I would get all my tests passing again before continuing to the next test.



      I never altered any previous tests when trying to get the new tests passing.



      My questions:



      1.) Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?

      2.) Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?

      3.) Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke? (considering I got them all passing again before moving to the next test)



      I am asking for a review of my TDD code & process.



      class RomanTest 


      public function runAll()
      echo '<pre>'."n";
      $methods = get_class_methods($this);
      foreach ($methods as $method)
      if ($method=='runAll')continue;
      $mo = $method;
      while (strlen($mo)<15)
      $mo .='-';

      echo "<b>$mo:</b> ";
      echo $this->$method() ? 'true' : 'false';
      echo "<br>n";

      echo "n</pre>";



      public function testI()
      $rmc = new RMC("I");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===1)
      return TRUE;

      return FALSE;


      public function testV()
      $rmc = new RMC("V");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===5)
      return TRUE;

      return FALSE;

      public function testX()
      $rmc = new RMC("X");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===10)return TRUE;
      else return FALSE;

      public function testL()
      $rmc = new RMC("L");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===50)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testC()
      $rmc = new RMC("C");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===100)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testD()
      $rmc = new RMC("D");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===500)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testM()
      $rmc = new RMC("M");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===1000)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;






      public function testII()
      $rmc = new RMC("II");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===2)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testIII()
      $rmc = new RMC("III");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===3)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testVI()
      $rmc = new RMC("VI");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===6)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testVII()
      $rmc = new RMC("VII");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===7)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;

      public function testXVII()
      $rmc = new RMC("XVII");
      if ($rmc->intVal()===17)return TRUE;
      return FALSE;







      public function testIV()
      $rmc = new RMC("IV");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===4);

      public function testIIV()
      $rmc = new RMC("IIV");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===3);

      public function testIIX()
      $rmc = new RMC("IIX");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===8);




      public function testXXXIX()
      $rmc = new RMC("XXXIX");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===39);

      public function testXXXIIX()
      $rmc = new RMC("XXXIIX");
      return ($rmc->intVal()===38);


      public function testMMMCMXCIX()
      return (new RMC("MMMCMXCIX"))->intVal()===3999;

      public function testMLXVI()
      return (new RMC("MLXVI"))->intVal()===1066;





      class RMC 

      private $numerals;

      private $vals = [
      'I' => 1,
      'V' => 5,
      'X' => 10,
      'L' => 50,
      'C' => 100,
      'D' => 500,
      'M' => 1000,

      ];

      public function __construct($numerals)
      $this->numerals = $numerals;


      public function intVal()
      $tot = 0;
      $lastTot = 0;
      $lastVal = 0;
      foreach (array_reverse(str_split($this->numerals)) as $nml)
      $value = $this->vals[$nml];
      if ($lastVal<=$value)
      $tot +=$value;
      $lastVal = $value;
      else if ($lastVal>$value)
      $tot -= $value;


      $lastTot = $tot;

      return $tot;




      And to run it:



      $test = new RomanTest();
      $test->runAll();






      php unit-testing






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 8 hours ago









      ReedReed

      1371 silver badge7 bronze badges




      1371 silver badge7 bronze badges




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$

          It is a good thing you completely seperated your testing code from the code you're testing.



          All your tests have the same basic structure, so why not create an array containing:



          [1 => "I",
          2 => "II",
          3 => "III",
          4 => "IV",
          5 => "V",
          ............];


          And use that array to run your tests. You could even use the same array to test a function that does the inverse.



          Moreso, having the inverse function is almost a must. It would further simplify the testing, since you can convert decimals to Roman numerals and back again. That way you don't need an array at all to do many tests.



          Please pay attention to the names you choose. To me RMC doesn't mean much. If you encounter this class name two years from now, will you immediately know what it means? I don't think so. Why not give it a proper name like: RomanNumerals? This class could have two methods: toRoman() and toDecimal(). The intVal() method name is confusing because there is already an intval() function which does something else.



          Your questions




          Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?




          You understand the basic principle, however I think it would have been possible to write all the tests before writing the real code. This is also often done in real life: The tests are known before the code is written. The writing of the code is driven by the tests. Or, to put it in another way: If you don't know what you're going to test, then how on earth could you write any code?




          Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?




          As I illustrated before, by writing the inverse function as well, you can do thousands of tests, without having to be very selective about it.




          Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke?




          Yes, that's fine. That's the whole idea behind test-driver-development: The tests tell you what's wrong.



          Remember that there are frameworks for writing tests. It is clearly possible to work without them, but why reinvent the wheel again? See, for instance: PHPUnit






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your feedback. I agree about RMC. Good points about toDecimal() instead of intVal(). Writing the inverse would make a lot of sense, and indeed would make it easy to run MANY tests. I'll give PHPUnit a go. Didn't feel like composering it in for such a simple use case. But I'm sure it (or something similar) is what I should be using going forward. IDK why RMC. I was going for RomanNumeralsConverter and just wanted to save typing. So it should have been RNC lol. I could have done use RomanNumeralsConverter as RNC; to have the shorthand.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            So do you think it is, generally, better to write ALL the tests before writing any code? I personally kind of like the incremental fashion of writing one test, failing, writing code to pass the test, then writing the next test, failing, coding, passing, repeat. Breaks the project down into smaller chunks of just building one tiny piece at a time. But I suppose I could write all the tests & then still focus on one test at a time if I need that bite-sized approach.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I'm rambling a bit because I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about lol
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Your incremental method clearly works, and it is still test-driven. For bigger projects it is probably the way to do it.
            $endgroup$
            – KIKO Software
            4 hours ago













          Your Answer






          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          );
          );
          , "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "196"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f223635%2ftest-driven-development-roman-numerals-php%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          3












          $begingroup$

          It is a good thing you completely seperated your testing code from the code you're testing.



          All your tests have the same basic structure, so why not create an array containing:



          [1 => "I",
          2 => "II",
          3 => "III",
          4 => "IV",
          5 => "V",
          ............];


          And use that array to run your tests. You could even use the same array to test a function that does the inverse.



          Moreso, having the inverse function is almost a must. It would further simplify the testing, since you can convert decimals to Roman numerals and back again. That way you don't need an array at all to do many tests.



          Please pay attention to the names you choose. To me RMC doesn't mean much. If you encounter this class name two years from now, will you immediately know what it means? I don't think so. Why not give it a proper name like: RomanNumerals? This class could have two methods: toRoman() and toDecimal(). The intVal() method name is confusing because there is already an intval() function which does something else.



          Your questions




          Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?




          You understand the basic principle, however I think it would have been possible to write all the tests before writing the real code. This is also often done in real life: The tests are known before the code is written. The writing of the code is driven by the tests. Or, to put it in another way: If you don't know what you're going to test, then how on earth could you write any code?




          Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?




          As I illustrated before, by writing the inverse function as well, you can do thousands of tests, without having to be very selective about it.




          Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke?




          Yes, that's fine. That's the whole idea behind test-driver-development: The tests tell you what's wrong.



          Remember that there are frameworks for writing tests. It is clearly possible to work without them, but why reinvent the wheel again? See, for instance: PHPUnit






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your feedback. I agree about RMC. Good points about toDecimal() instead of intVal(). Writing the inverse would make a lot of sense, and indeed would make it easy to run MANY tests. I'll give PHPUnit a go. Didn't feel like composering it in for such a simple use case. But I'm sure it (or something similar) is what I should be using going forward. IDK why RMC. I was going for RomanNumeralsConverter and just wanted to save typing. So it should have been RNC lol. I could have done use RomanNumeralsConverter as RNC; to have the shorthand.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            So do you think it is, generally, better to write ALL the tests before writing any code? I personally kind of like the incremental fashion of writing one test, failing, writing code to pass the test, then writing the next test, failing, coding, passing, repeat. Breaks the project down into smaller chunks of just building one tiny piece at a time. But I suppose I could write all the tests & then still focus on one test at a time if I need that bite-sized approach.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I'm rambling a bit because I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about lol
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Your incremental method clearly works, and it is still test-driven. For bigger projects it is probably the way to do it.
            $endgroup$
            – KIKO Software
            4 hours ago















          3












          $begingroup$

          It is a good thing you completely seperated your testing code from the code you're testing.



          All your tests have the same basic structure, so why not create an array containing:



          [1 => "I",
          2 => "II",
          3 => "III",
          4 => "IV",
          5 => "V",
          ............];


          And use that array to run your tests. You could even use the same array to test a function that does the inverse.



          Moreso, having the inverse function is almost a must. It would further simplify the testing, since you can convert decimals to Roman numerals and back again. That way you don't need an array at all to do many tests.



          Please pay attention to the names you choose. To me RMC doesn't mean much. If you encounter this class name two years from now, will you immediately know what it means? I don't think so. Why not give it a proper name like: RomanNumerals? This class could have two methods: toRoman() and toDecimal(). The intVal() method name is confusing because there is already an intval() function which does something else.



          Your questions




          Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?




          You understand the basic principle, however I think it would have been possible to write all the tests before writing the real code. This is also often done in real life: The tests are known before the code is written. The writing of the code is driven by the tests. Or, to put it in another way: If you don't know what you're going to test, then how on earth could you write any code?




          Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?




          As I illustrated before, by writing the inverse function as well, you can do thousands of tests, without having to be very selective about it.




          Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke?




          Yes, that's fine. That's the whole idea behind test-driver-development: The tests tell you what's wrong.



          Remember that there are frameworks for writing tests. It is clearly possible to work without them, but why reinvent the wheel again? See, for instance: PHPUnit






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your feedback. I agree about RMC. Good points about toDecimal() instead of intVal(). Writing the inverse would make a lot of sense, and indeed would make it easy to run MANY tests. I'll give PHPUnit a go. Didn't feel like composering it in for such a simple use case. But I'm sure it (or something similar) is what I should be using going forward. IDK why RMC. I was going for RomanNumeralsConverter and just wanted to save typing. So it should have been RNC lol. I could have done use RomanNumeralsConverter as RNC; to have the shorthand.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            So do you think it is, generally, better to write ALL the tests before writing any code? I personally kind of like the incremental fashion of writing one test, failing, writing code to pass the test, then writing the next test, failing, coding, passing, repeat. Breaks the project down into smaller chunks of just building one tiny piece at a time. But I suppose I could write all the tests & then still focus on one test at a time if I need that bite-sized approach.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I'm rambling a bit because I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about lol
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Your incremental method clearly works, and it is still test-driven. For bigger projects it is probably the way to do it.
            $endgroup$
            – KIKO Software
            4 hours ago













          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          It is a good thing you completely seperated your testing code from the code you're testing.



          All your tests have the same basic structure, so why not create an array containing:



          [1 => "I",
          2 => "II",
          3 => "III",
          4 => "IV",
          5 => "V",
          ............];


          And use that array to run your tests. You could even use the same array to test a function that does the inverse.



          Moreso, having the inverse function is almost a must. It would further simplify the testing, since you can convert decimals to Roman numerals and back again. That way you don't need an array at all to do many tests.



          Please pay attention to the names you choose. To me RMC doesn't mean much. If you encounter this class name two years from now, will you immediately know what it means? I don't think so. Why not give it a proper name like: RomanNumerals? This class could have two methods: toRoman() and toDecimal(). The intVal() method name is confusing because there is already an intval() function which does something else.



          Your questions




          Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?




          You understand the basic principle, however I think it would have been possible to write all the tests before writing the real code. This is also often done in real life: The tests are known before the code is written. The writing of the code is driven by the tests. Or, to put it in another way: If you don't know what you're going to test, then how on earth could you write any code?




          Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?




          As I illustrated before, by writing the inverse function as well, you can do thousands of tests, without having to be very selective about it.




          Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke?




          Yes, that's fine. That's the whole idea behind test-driver-development: The tests tell you what's wrong.



          Remember that there are frameworks for writing tests. It is clearly possible to work without them, but why reinvent the wheel again? See, for instance: PHPUnit






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          It is a good thing you completely seperated your testing code from the code you're testing.



          All your tests have the same basic structure, so why not create an array containing:



          [1 => "I",
          2 => "II",
          3 => "III",
          4 => "IV",
          5 => "V",
          ............];


          And use that array to run your tests. You could even use the same array to test a function that does the inverse.



          Moreso, having the inverse function is almost a must. It would further simplify the testing, since you can convert decimals to Roman numerals and back again. That way you don't need an array at all to do many tests.



          Please pay attention to the names you choose. To me RMC doesn't mean much. If you encounter this class name two years from now, will you immediately know what it means? I don't think so. Why not give it a proper name like: RomanNumerals? This class could have two methods: toRoman() and toDecimal(). The intVal() method name is confusing because there is already an intval() function which does something else.



          Your questions




          Is this a good work flow for TDD? If not, what could I improve?




          You understand the basic principle, however I think it would have been possible to write all the tests before writing the real code. This is also often done in real life: The tests are known before the code is written. The writing of the code is driven by the tests. Or, to put it in another way: If you don't know what you're going to test, then how on earth could you write any code?




          Did I run enough tests? Do I need to write more?




          As I illustrated before, by writing the inverse function as well, you can do thousands of tests, without having to be very selective about it.




          Is it okay that, during intVal() re-writes, previous tests broke?




          Yes, that's fine. That's the whole idea behind test-driver-development: The tests tell you what's wrong.



          Remember that there are frameworks for writing tests. It is clearly possible to work without them, but why reinvent the wheel again? See, for instance: PHPUnit







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 5 hours ago









          KIKO SoftwareKIKO Software

          3,5866 silver badges16 bronze badges




          3,5866 silver badges16 bronze badges











          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your feedback. I agree about RMC. Good points about toDecimal() instead of intVal(). Writing the inverse would make a lot of sense, and indeed would make it easy to run MANY tests. I'll give PHPUnit a go. Didn't feel like composering it in for such a simple use case. But I'm sure it (or something similar) is what I should be using going forward. IDK why RMC. I was going for RomanNumeralsConverter and just wanted to save typing. So it should have been RNC lol. I could have done use RomanNumeralsConverter as RNC; to have the shorthand.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            So do you think it is, generally, better to write ALL the tests before writing any code? I personally kind of like the incremental fashion of writing one test, failing, writing code to pass the test, then writing the next test, failing, coding, passing, repeat. Breaks the project down into smaller chunks of just building one tiny piece at a time. But I suppose I could write all the tests & then still focus on one test at a time if I need that bite-sized approach.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I'm rambling a bit because I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about lol
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Your incremental method clearly works, and it is still test-driven. For bigger projects it is probably the way to do it.
            $endgroup$
            – KIKO Software
            4 hours ago
















          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for your feedback. I agree about RMC. Good points about toDecimal() instead of intVal(). Writing the inverse would make a lot of sense, and indeed would make it easy to run MANY tests. I'll give PHPUnit a go. Didn't feel like composering it in for such a simple use case. But I'm sure it (or something similar) is what I should be using going forward. IDK why RMC. I was going for RomanNumeralsConverter and just wanted to save typing. So it should have been RNC lol. I could have done use RomanNumeralsConverter as RNC; to have the shorthand.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            So do you think it is, generally, better to write ALL the tests before writing any code? I personally kind of like the incremental fashion of writing one test, failing, writing code to pass the test, then writing the next test, failing, coding, passing, repeat. Breaks the project down into smaller chunks of just building one tiny piece at a time. But I suppose I could write all the tests & then still focus on one test at a time if I need that bite-sized approach.
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I'm rambling a bit because I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about lol
            $endgroup$
            – Reed
            5 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Your incremental method clearly works, and it is still test-driven. For bigger projects it is probably the way to do it.
            $endgroup$
            – KIKO Software
            4 hours ago















          $begingroup$
          Thank you for your feedback. I agree about RMC. Good points about toDecimal() instead of intVal(). Writing the inverse would make a lot of sense, and indeed would make it easy to run MANY tests. I'll give PHPUnit a go. Didn't feel like composering it in for such a simple use case. But I'm sure it (or something similar) is what I should be using going forward. IDK why RMC. I was going for RomanNumeralsConverter and just wanted to save typing. So it should have been RNC lol. I could have done use RomanNumeralsConverter as RNC; to have the shorthand.
          $endgroup$
          – Reed
          5 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Thank you for your feedback. I agree about RMC. Good points about toDecimal() instead of intVal(). Writing the inverse would make a lot of sense, and indeed would make it easy to run MANY tests. I'll give PHPUnit a go. Didn't feel like composering it in for such a simple use case. But I'm sure it (or something similar) is what I should be using going forward. IDK why RMC. I was going for RomanNumeralsConverter and just wanted to save typing. So it should have been RNC lol. I could have done use RomanNumeralsConverter as RNC; to have the shorthand.
          $endgroup$
          – Reed
          5 hours ago












          $begingroup$
          So do you think it is, generally, better to write ALL the tests before writing any code? I personally kind of like the incremental fashion of writing one test, failing, writing code to pass the test, then writing the next test, failing, coding, passing, repeat. Breaks the project down into smaller chunks of just building one tiny piece at a time. But I suppose I could write all the tests & then still focus on one test at a time if I need that bite-sized approach.
          $endgroup$
          – Reed
          5 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          So do you think it is, generally, better to write ALL the tests before writing any code? I personally kind of like the incremental fashion of writing one test, failing, writing code to pass the test, then writing the next test, failing, coding, passing, repeat. Breaks the project down into smaller chunks of just building one tiny piece at a time. But I suppose I could write all the tests & then still focus on one test at a time if I need that bite-sized approach.
          $endgroup$
          – Reed
          5 hours ago












          $begingroup$
          I'm rambling a bit because I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about lol
          $endgroup$
          – Reed
          5 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          I'm rambling a bit because I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about lol
          $endgroup$
          – Reed
          5 hours ago




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Your incremental method clearly works, and it is still test-driven. For bigger projects it is probably the way to do it.
          $endgroup$
          – KIKO Software
          4 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Your incremental method clearly works, and it is still test-driven. For bigger projects it is probably the way to do it.
          $endgroup$
          – KIKO Software
          4 hours ago

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f223635%2ftest-driven-development-roman-numerals-php%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          19. јануар Садржај Догађаји Рођења Смрти Празници и дани сећања Види још Референце Мени за навигацијуу

          Israel Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Geografie | Politică | Demografie | Educație | Economie | Cultură | Note explicative | Note bibliografice | Bibliografie | Legături externe | Meniu de navigaresite web oficialfacebooktweeterGoogle+Instagramcanal YouTubeInstagramtextmodificaremodificarewww.technion.ac.ilnew.huji.ac.ilwww.weizmann.ac.ilwww1.biu.ac.ilenglish.tau.ac.ilwww.haifa.ac.ilin.bgu.ac.ilwww.openu.ac.ilwww.ariel.ac.ilCIA FactbookHarta Israelului"Negotiating Jerusalem," Palestine–Israel JournalThe Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew: A Slavic Language in Search of a Semitic Past„Arabic in Israel: an official language and a cultural bridge”„Latest Population Statistics for Israel”„Israel Population”„Tables”„Report for Selected Countries and Subjects”Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone„Distribution of family income - Gini index”The World FactbookJerusalem Law„Israel”„Israel”„Zionist Leaders: David Ben-Gurion 1886–1973”„The status of Jerusalem”„Analysis: Kadima's big plans”„Israel's Hard-Learned Lessons”„The Legacy of Undefined Borders, Tel Aviv Notes No. 40, 5 iunie 2002”„Israel Journal: A Land Without Borders”„Population”„Israel closes decade with population of 7.5 million”Time Series-DataBank„Selected Statistics on Jerusalem Day 2007 (Hebrew)”Golan belongs to Syria, Druze protestGlobal Survey 2006: Middle East Progress Amid Global Gains in FreedomWHO: Life expectancy in Israel among highest in the worldInternational Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2011: Nominal GDP list of countries. Data for the year 2010.„Israel's accession to the OECD”Popular Opinion„On the Move”Hosea 12:5„Walking the Bible Timeline”„Palestine: History”„Return to Zion”An invention called 'the Jewish people' – Haaretz – Israel NewsoriginalJewish and Non-Jewish Population of Palestine-Israel (1517–2004)ImmigrationJewishvirtuallibrary.orgChapter One: The Heralders of Zionism„The birth of modern Israel: A scrap of paper that changed history”„League of Nations: The Mandate for Palestine, 24 iulie 1922”The Population of Palestine Prior to 1948originalBackground Paper No. 47 (ST/DPI/SER.A/47)History: Foreign DominationTwo Hundred and Seventh Plenary Meeting„Israel (Labor Zionism)”Population, by Religion and Population GroupThe Suez CrisisAdolf EichmannJustice Ministry Reply to Amnesty International Report„The Interregnum”Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs – The Palestinian National Covenant- July 1968Research on terrorism: trends, achievements & failuresThe Routledge Atlas of the Arab–Israeli conflict: The Complete History of the Struggle and the Efforts to Resolve It"George Habash, Palestinian Terrorism Tactician, Dies at 82."„1973: Arab states attack Israeli forces”Agranat Commission„Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?”original„After 4 Years, Intifada Still Smolders”From the End of the Cold War to 2001originalThe Oslo Accords, 1993Israel-PLO Recognition – Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat – Sept 9- 1993Foundation for Middle East PeaceSources of Population Growth: Total Israeli Population and Settler Population, 1991–2003original„Israel marks Rabin assassination”The Wye River Memorandumoriginal„West Bank barrier route disputed, Israeli missile kills 2”"Permanent Ceasefire to Be Based on Creation Of Buffer Zone Free of Armed Personnel Other than UN, Lebanese Forces"„Hezbollah kills 8 soldiers, kidnaps two in offensive on northern border”„Olmert confirms peace talks with Syria”„Battleground Gaza: Israeli ground forces invade the strip”„IDF begins Gaza troop withdrawal, hours after ending 3-week offensive”„THE LAND: Geography and Climate”„Area of districts, sub-districts, natural regions and lakes”„Israel - Geography”„Makhteshim Country”Israel and the Palestinian Territories„Makhtesh Ramon”„The Living Dead Sea”„Temperatures reach record high in Pakistan”„Climate Extremes In Israel”Israel in figures„Deuteronom”„JNF: 240 million trees planted since 1901”„Vegetation of Israel and Neighboring Countries”Environmental Law in Israel„Executive branch”„Israel's election process explained”„The Electoral System in Israel”„Constitution for Israel”„All 120 incoming Knesset members”„Statul ISRAEL”„The Judiciary: The Court System”„Israel's high court unique in region”„Israel and the International Criminal Court: A Legal Battlefield”„Localities and population, by population group, district, sub-district and natural region”„Israel: Districts, Major Cities, Urban Localities & Metropolitan Areas”„Israel-Egypt Relations: Background & Overview of Peace Treaty”„Solana to Haaretz: New Rules of War Needed for Age of Terror”„Israel's Announcement Regarding Settlements”„United Nations Security Council Resolution 497”„Security Council resolution 478 (1980) on the status of Jerusalem”„Arabs will ask U.N. to seek razing of Israeli wall”„Olmert: Willing to trade land for peace”„Mapping Peace between Syria and Israel”„Egypt: Israel must accept the land-for-peace formula”„Israel: Age structure from 2005 to 2015”„Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990–2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition”10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61340-X„World Health Statistics 2014”„Life expectancy for Israeli men world's 4th highest”„Family Structure and Well-Being Across Israel's Diverse Population”„Fertility among Jewish and Muslim Women in Israel, by Level of Religiosity, 1979-2009”„Israel leaders in birth rate, but poverty major challenge”„Ethnic Groups”„Israel's population: Over 8.5 million”„Israel - Ethnic groups”„Jews, by country of origin and age”„Minority Communities in Israel: Background & Overview”„Israel”„Language in Israel”„Selected Data from the 2011 Social Survey on Mastery of the Hebrew Language and Usage of Languages”„Religions”„5 facts about Israeli Druze, a unique religious and ethnic group”„Israël”Israel Country Study Guide„Haredi city in Negev – blessing or curse?”„New town Harish harbors hopes of being more than another Pleasantville”„List of localities, in alphabetical order”„Muncitorii români, doriți în Israel”„Prietenia româno-israeliană la nevoie se cunoaște”„The Higher Education System in Israel”„Middle East”„Academic Ranking of World Universities 2016”„Israel”„Israel”„Jewish Nobel Prize Winners”„All Nobel Prizes in Literature”„All Nobel Peace Prizes”„All Prizes in Economic Sciences”„All Nobel Prizes in Chemistry”„List of Fields Medallists”„Sakharov Prize”„Țara care și-a sfidat "destinul" și se bate umăr la umăr cu Silicon Valley”„Apple's R&D center in Israel grew to about 800 employees”„Tim Cook: Apple's Herzliya R&D center second-largest in world”„Lecții de economie de la Israel”„Land use”Israel Investment and Business GuideA Country Study: IsraelCentral Bureau of StatisticsFlorin Diaconu, „Kadima: Flexibilitate și pragmatism, dar nici un compromis în chestiuni vitale", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 71-72Florin Diaconu, „Likud: Dreapta israeliană constant opusă retrocedării teritoriilor cureite prin luptă în 1967", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 73-74MassadaIsraelul a crescut in 50 de ani cât alte state intr-un mileniuIsrael Government PortalIsraelIsraelIsraelmmmmmXX451232cb118646298(data)4027808-634110000 0004 0372 0767n7900328503691455-bb46-37e3-91d2-cb064a35ffcc1003570400564274ge1294033523775214929302638955X146498911146498911

          Кастелфранко ди Сопра Становништво Референце Спољашње везе Мени за навигацију43°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.5588543°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.558853179688„The GeoNames geographical database”„Istituto Nazionale di Statistica”проширитиууWorldCat156923403n850174324558639-1cb14643287r(подаци)