Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] New Article: Further Report Refactoring

Expand Messages
  • Kelly Anderson
    ... But that was my very point... It MIGHT be faster to the first one. Being first is very important in business, particularly in marketing. Bill Gates didn t
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 25, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      On 6/23/07, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
      > Hello, Kelly. On Wednesday, June 20, 2007, at 12:16:48 PM, you
      > wrote:
      > > Quoting from the article:
      > > I can't imagine that you would "just do things right" using the Big
      > > Ball of Mud approach. Far from it. I can imagine that you would have
      > > some really ugly code that had might have spit out more of a report
      > > than you have at this point.
      > You must have a heck of an imagination, because there's no way I'd
      > do that unless the report was a one-off. It might be faster to the
      > first one, but not to the third revision.

      But that was my very point... It MIGHT be faster to the first one.
      Being first is very important in business, particularly in marketing.
      Bill Gates didn't win because DOS was superior to CP/M, but because he
      was there first, and willing to do the deal. If crap exists, some
      people will start buying it, even if the promise of something better
      is just around the corner. Especially when it doesn't matter, like
      "What O/S should we slap on this meaningless PC thing anyway?"

      > > In my mind, XP and TDD specifically aren't really about programming
      > > fast. They are about programming deliberately, predictably. They are
      > > about creating scalability, understandable code, quality results, a
      > > pleasant working environment free of many of the aggravations that so
      > > often pop up in the BBofM approach. It sure sounds like you're having
      > > fun... :-) The question though, is what the Ferengi would think...
      > If it has to work and is going to take more than a few weeks, the
      > Ferengi would like it. Rule 58.

      Touche. :-)

      > > Once a program gets large enough, does this all translate into better
      > > overall velocity? I think that it probably does. But speed is not the
      > > primary reason I would choose XP, especially for a small project
      > > (unless I thought it would later become a large project).
      > To a first approximation ... they all do.

      I agree. The question is how large does a project have to be for Agile
      methodologies to be meaningful, and are there any meaningful projects
      left that are below this size. I suspect that the answers are "not
      very large" and "not very many"... but not zero in either case.

      > > In the competitive real world, I think the focused BBofM crowd would
      > > be far ahead of where you are at this point. I understand that this is
      > > a VERY part time endeavor... and that you have made decent progress
      > > given the limited time you've invested in it. Were I an investor in
      > > Pot Shots Inc... I would feel a little disappointed and fearful at
      > > this point.
      > Though you say otherwise, it seems you are forgetting that we work
      > at most two hours a day and an average of less than three days a
      > week.

      Which is precisely the reason that a focused BBofM project would have
      already beat you to market. ;-) The world isn't going to "play fair"
      and only work 6 hours a week using BBofM. I have to ponder, for
      example, that if I had a customer, whether in the time since February
      when you started this project, whether in the same six hours a week
      (or less), I could have successfully outsourced this project for far
      less than your and Chet's hourly wage, even though they might work 40+
      hours a week on it. I'm merely stating that there are other ways that
      you can spend just a couple of hours a week to build a program in
      non-Agile ways. When I was working on my email program, I kept 4-6
      programmers busy in about a half hour a day. That code was developed
      using TDD (at my insistence), and was really well done. I understand
      that your goals on this project are only indirectly commercial.
      Perhaps this is not even fair to talk about given the context, but it
      is how much of the world is working these days.

      > > I bring this up because it's the typical sort of thing I hear when I
      > > try to raise the level of XP-ness in the companies I have worked for.
      > > I value the things XP delivers. I really do. But it's a harder sell to
      > > the business people, so I'm curious as to your response.
      > I just go where people want what I do.

      I try to go where I think I can be successful. Similar, but subtly different.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.