This Kata was originally created by Terry Hughes (http://twitter.com/TerryHughes). It is already on GitHub here. See also Bobby Johnson's description of the kata.
As Bobby Johnson points out in his article "Why Most Solutions to Gilded Rose Miss The Bigger Picture", it'll actually give you better practice at handling a legacy code situation if you do this Kata in the original C#. However, I think this kata is also really useful for practicing writing good tests using different frameworks and approaches, and the small changes I've made help with that. I think it's also interesting to compare what the refactored code and tests look like in different programming languages.
I use this kata as part of my work as a technical coach. I wrote a lot about the coaching method I use in this book Technical Agile Coaching with the Samman method. A while back I wrote this article "Writing Good Tests for the Gilded Rose Kata" about how you could use this kata in a coding dojo.
The simplest way is to just clone the code and start hacking away improving the design. You'll want to look at the "Gilded Rose Requirements" which explains what the code is for. I strongly advise you that you'll also need some tests if you want to make sure you don't break the code while you refactor.
You could write some unit tests yourself, using the requirements to identify suitable test cases. I've provided a failing unit test in a popular test framework as a starting point for most languages. Carefully look at expectedOutcomes to understand how the program should behave.
IMPORTANT: Whichever testing approach you choose, the idea of the exercise is to do some deliberate practice, and improve your skills at designing test cases and refactoring. The idea is not to re-write the code from scratch, but rather to practice designing tests, taking small steps, running the tests often, and incrementally improving the design.
- Meets the spec
- Developed test-first - tests written to cover existing functionality.
- Passes tests and code is linted
- Methods are extracted one by one from the nested
ifstatement per item type - Classes that encapsulate item update procedures are extracted per item type
- Shop#updateQuality() has no
if() {}statements
- See a teacher!