Link Details

The included diagram seems to contradict his core claim that TDD is different than Test First Development. I am not voting down on the merits of TDD versus some other approach. Instead, I am voting down because the article, as written, utterly fails to explain what exactly differentiates TDD from Test First Development. He says they are different, uses exclamation points, and obviously believes it to be true. But after reading the article, I did not feel convinced or enlightened.

Just to pick on one of many unsubstantiated claims, take this one: "TDD code should look simple and lean". I will argue that ALL code should look simple and lean.

Another gem: "TDD is a design practice, is more related with emergent design than with testing.". Perhaps this is true, but that's all he says about that. How about backing it up with some examples? Without more detail and supporting arguments, this adds nothing new to our collective knowledge.

I agree. TDD is more about getting away from fear-driven development. Whether the short term goal is testable code or emergent design is not really the most important aspect - To me, it's both.

The more interesting aspect for me is keeping test designs abstract enough to be flexible and concrete enough to be usable and understandable - Gerard Meszaros's book is a good start in that direction.

As far as I know and what I have learned from the experts, TDD = Test-First Development + Continuous Integration + Refactoring + OO Metrics + Code Coverage.
,

That's precisely what the article says....

Not really. I didn't find that message in your article. Your article tries to promote that TDD is not related to TFD. The first step in TDD (IMHO) is TFD.
,