<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When acceptance tests are better than unit tests</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jonkruger.com/blog/2012/02/20/when-acceptance-tests-are-better-than-unit-tests/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jonkruger.com/blog/2012/02/20/when-acceptance-tests-are-better-than-unit-tests/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 15:06:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: arpadf</title>
		<link>http://jonkruger.com/blog/2012/02/20/when-acceptance-tests-are-better-than-unit-tests/comment-page-1/#comment-6135</link>
		<dc:creator>arpadf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 10:41:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonkruger.com/blog/?p=1036#comment-6135</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think all this confusion in the industry comes from way back when automation was mostly possible only for unit-test, thus emphasis fall on unit-test. And it made sense to limit acceptance or integration tests because they were mostly manual or very hard to setup.

But, these days there are techniques to automate acceptance test and overcome integration tests limitations (hardware and network dependencies) so writing more acceptance tests make sense and you are absolutely right I think, this will bring down the need to write unit-tests for everything.

And there&#039;s more! We can also redefine the concept of TDD to move away from the focus only on unit-tests.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think all this confusion in the industry comes from way back when automation was mostly possible only for unit-test, thus emphasis fall on unit-test. And it made sense to limit acceptance or integration tests because they were mostly manual or very hard to setup.</p>
<p>But, these days there are techniques to automate acceptance test and overcome integration tests limitations (hardware and network dependencies) so writing more acceptance tests make sense and you are absolutely right I think, this will bring down the need to write unit-tests for everything.</p>
<p>And there&#8217;s more! We can also redefine the concept of TDD to move away from the focus only on unit-tests.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Kruger&#8217;s Blog &#187; When unit tests are better than acceptance tests</title>
		<link>http://jonkruger.com/blog/2012/02/20/when-acceptance-tests-are-better-than-unit-tests/comment-page-1/#comment-5635</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Kruger&#8217;s Blog &#187; When unit tests are better than acceptance tests</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 15:22:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonkruger.com/blog/?p=1036#comment-5635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] When acceptance tests are better than unit tests [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] When acceptance tests are better than unit tests [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
