http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660Ayende, See my thoughts here; it got too long for a comment. http://hrboyceiii.blogspot.com/2007/08/fitting-acceptance-tests-with-dsls.html http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment6http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment6Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:13:14 GMTFrans, You're not that crazy. However, I use Word, which compiles what I'm writing as I write, fixes mistakes and offers suggestions. So if Word as an IDE works for writers, a similar tool cannot be that far, right? Gil http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment5http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment5Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:23:27 GMTFrans, The example above is for a specific scenario, but if I had to build a DSL for a business users to use, I would sit with the analyst and work a syntax with him, in his terms. http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment4http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment4Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:27:07 GMTYou all think like programmers, but the business analist doesn't think like a programmer. Using a non-ambiguistic DSL with strict syntax won't work, as these people don't think in programming languages and syntaxis. So they need a language which allows them to formulate the same thing in a variety of ways, and it should be flexible and tolerant in syntax checking. Otherwise the business analist is spending a lot of time fighting errors in the specification formulation. For the people who think I'm crazy: think back to the days when you had to write your papers in LaTex or nroff and you had to compile (!) your documents and had to fix (!) syntax errors. Frustrating, wasn't it? http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment3http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment3Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:47:38 GMTI agree. One of the attractive features of FIT is the ability for non-programmers to write the tests. The table metaphors worked well with people I described the tool to. DSL and fluent interface could be a step in the right (Although other) direction, but the simplicity for non-programmer maybe lost. I'd like to keep that. As a programmer, I do like the syntax here. http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment2http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment2Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:19:01 GMTI agree that DSL could be the way to go but the DSL has to be less code oriented otherwise the customers will not be able to participate in the writing of the requirements and running the tests. FIT may have a poor implementation but the concept is sound in my way of seeing it. http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment1http://ayende.com/2708/business-oriented-testing-fit-vs-dsl#comment1Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:44:18 GMT