Jessica Kerr shows the charm of autogenerated test data, the beauty of expressing only what matters, and the challenge of stating what you need without repeating the code under test using ScalaCheck. Property-based testing isn't only for more tests with less code. It's about constraining your implementation in all the ways that matter and fewer of the ways that don't.
For more than a dozen years, Jessica Kerr toiled at enterprise software in Java and C. Two years ago, the promise and intrigue of functional programming led her to Scala. When she isn't speaking about at development conferences in North America and Europe, she works in Clojure at Outpace.
Software is Changing the World. QCon empowers software development by facilitating the spread of knowledge and innovation in the developer community. A practitioner-driven conference, QCon is designed for technical team leads, architects, engineering directors, and project managers who influence innovation in their teams.
Also, example-based tests do carry a notion of what's important - it's in test names. Naming your tests after the example values used in them is effectively stupid. Just because they are example-based doesn't mean you shouldn't think about a more general meaning of your tests. Admittedly, property-based testing takes that to a whole other level by condensing all examples that obey the same rule down to a single test.