Hello,

I guess this isn't strictly a Ruby question, but it's about stuff that comes up on the ML quite a bit, so I thought I'd mention it.

I've heard a lot of people saying great things about test-first programming (on the ML).  I've heard a lot of people saying great things about bottom-up programming (off the ML).  They both seem to have their merits, but they seem totally opposed to each other.  Am I wrong in that?

Are there people using both?  Or am I confusing "test-first" with "test-driven" development?  (I thought they were the same thing.)

In any case, it seems that if you choose one, you must eschew the other (consciously or otherwise).  Assuming it is consciously, how do you reconcile the apparent benefits of the methodology you don't use with the fact that you don't use it?

I mean, I hate to ask it, but...

"Which is better??"

Chris