1. 12
  1.  

  2. 1

    “TDD” is already taken; that’s an acronym collision.

    1. 4

      Yes - I really wish people would refer to RFC 5513 when writing these things.

    2. 1

      [Blank] Driven Development - I have seen a few of these over the last few weeks. There was type driven, test driven, and now trait driven. Isn’t this missing the point? If these singular things drive your development, where does your actual design come from?

      One thing never can model the entire process, there are going to be things where it doesn’t cover.

      1. 1

        You’re looking for the [Blank] Oriented Design family.

        1. 1

          It’s just a short article and didn’t even advocate a design methodology. The first paragraph says “this title is a lie.”

        2. 1

          This has parallels to protocol oriented programming in Swift and the emphasis on interfaces for polymorphism in Go. Reaching farther afield, Haskell and similar languages support polymorphism exclusively through “type classes” which are more or less interfaces.