Test driven development with silly/vague method names, like it() and should(), often written by people who don't write the code so behaviour can be defined separately from implementation.

It was quite popular in the ruby community a couple of years ago.

I have explained Behavior Driven Development and its benefits here http://www.mehdi-khalili.com/bdd-to-the-rescue.

Hope it helps.

Thanks for that but to be honest it just sound like more of the same, but viewed from a different angle.

My understanding of your write up is that that tests may be written without understanding the problem. I mean that is just dumb TDD religious zealots who would do that sort of thing, assuming that test make up for design (and thought process). I also think that the verification process is an inherent part of waterfall model - hence the iterations.