Is Gherkin being used at all? #6084
Replies: 1 comment 2 replies
-
Yes
No! Compare the difference
In 1st case you make an explicit action in a browser - you click a button or link with name or label Each command on 1st scenario is pushed to browser to perform it. 2nd scenario hides implementation to provide higher abstraction language. In order to focus on business processes. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
No, I don't agree. Where does public function iGoToCheckoutProcess() {
// 27 actions...
}Which is exactly the same what you can do with Codeception: $I->goToCheckout();...and then create a helper which is exactly the same as above, i.e. the implementation is "hidden" too. BTW: Your answer "Yes" is to the used-in-practice question? (Not to the just-an-idea question ?) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
yes i use gherkin and no it's not the same. the first syntax is also more understandable for non-programmers. as programmer you are used to |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
As I mentioned at #6080 (comment), a comparison between Behat and Codeception would be great. And I would say that https://codeception.com/docs/07-BDD is the right place for it.
But first of all I have a general question: Is Gherkin (in Codeception) really used in practice?? Or was this just some idea a couple of years ago?
What I can say in any case: You're using the term "BDD" as a synonym for Gherkin throughout the docs. I would say this is wrong, cause:
... describes the app's behavior just in the same manner as:
... it's just a different syntax.
So what I'd do in any case is replace most occurrences of "BDD" with "Gherkin". After all, Codeception's description at https://github.com/Codeception/Codeception/blob/4.1/composer.json#L3 is
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions