[rmanolis]

I think it's is finite. I couldn't think of another "can't" statement for my exercise. If you find any please tell me to patch the code.

You thinking in DDD because in CDD there is no domain logic. Everything is part of stack trace tree

[salomonk_mur]

Your exercise can't: 1. Tell me who other people's friends are. 2. Change it's output if a spammer stops pinging after 1 hour. 3. Count the amount of times a person has pinged in their lifetimes. 4. Build a pyramid 5. Output Pi 6. Make me lasagna

[rmanolis]

yes, it can't.

For some “can't” statements, you don't need to write any error.

The “can't” statements in CDD are for actions and input that you could take, but the software deliberately prevents you from doing them.

There are no actions or input, requested from the exercise that make it possible to do the list you gave me, so it does not make sense to create an error for them.

[kubanczyk]

The TDD and DDD ultimately tell you which inputs are of interest. CDD doesn't, so it's apples to oranges.

People who think that specifically TDD is a programming technique didn't get the entire memo. It can drive you to design and re-design your app's inputs. But that part of TDD is tacit - hard to teach.

[rmanolis]

What are you even talking about?

where in the article say that CDD does not care about inputs?

Also in the article says "The main idea of TDD is to design the software through tests." do you disagree with that?

[tharkun__]

I guess while you're at it, you are also going to tell us how you solved the halting problem then? Why not prove if P != NP or not while you're at it. I mean after all, we just couldn't think of any other reason why P should not equal NP, so it must be equal, mustn't it?

Not being able to quickly think of more test cases for whatever you're trying to test at any given moment does not prove anything. You also seem to be very hung up on something about stack traces that I'm really not able to figure out what it really is, even though you keep mentioning it.