Hi Andreas, 


	You should look at my BrowseUnit package on SqueakMap.
	It basically allows you to do all you mention in a couple of
	clicks, including amazing teleporation abilities ... :-).
	Any suggestion and enhancements are of course welcome. 

		Romain Robbes 

"Andreas Raab" <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> Nevin, 
> 
> I don't think you got the point of what I was saying - which was that the
> overhead required to set up everything for testing a single method is too
> high. I'm sure there are many arguments against having tests literally
> embedded in methods (the major one probably that it breaks the "test first"
> approach) but I was mostly referring to the environment. For example, if you
> harden out some of those conventions then the environment could help you
> incredibly if you've just written a method Foo>>bar. When you indicate that
> you want to write a test, the system could automatically:
> * provide a category "FooBar-Tests" (depending on the category your class
> resides in)
> * provide a "TestCase subclass: #FooTests"
> * add a method "testBar"
> * hand you an editor for this test
> All of the above have to be done manually right now and even in the best
> case it'll cost you a couple of minutes during which you are simply diverted
> from what you really want to do. By the end of the day that's what gets into
> people's way if they just hack along. 
> 
> If you make it hard for people to write tests, then no tests will be
> written.  
> 
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas