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

Re: Agile thinking in action by Jim O. Coplien

Expand Messages
  • igouy2
    ... valuable is to ... to first ... that support ... Thanks for the clarification - it s harder for me to read that response as utterly cynical :-) Again
    Message 1 of 156 , Oct 27, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com, "Steven Gordon"
      <sgordonphd@...> wrote:
      >
      > On 10/26/07, igouy2 <igouy2@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > > The best way to convince yourself that TDD is (or is not)
      valuable is to
      > > > give it a legitimate try. The best way to convince others is
      to first
      > > > convince yourself. Then, it is natural to cite the studies
      that support
      > > > your educated opinion and explain away the ones that do not.
      > >
      > > You can fool most of the people most of the time?
      > >
      >
      > No, because the expectations that I set with any client is that what
      > matters is how well we can address their particular problems. How
      > things have worked in other contexts may lend some credence, but
      > ultimately do not matter.
      >
      > The game plan is to collaboratively decide what the few most critical
      > problems are, measure them, apply process change(s) that are
      > appropriate for those problems, remeasure, and repeat until the client
      > decides to stop (either because they can continue the process without
      > us or decide that the changes are causing more pain than the
      > improvements are worth). TDD may not be the appropriate remedy for
      > the most critical problems at a particular client, but it always
      > become an appropriate remedy at some point.
      >
      > The main reason I would cite academic studies is to provide client
      > decision makers comfort and CYA, not because I really believe that any
      > such studies could possibly be rigorously valid.

      Thanks for the clarification - it's harder for me to read that
      response as utterly cynical :-)

      Again without being cynical, it's not surprising to see developer
      testing case-studies labelled as test driven development - there isn't
      a buzzword for non-TDD developer testing.
    • igouy2
      ... valuable is to ... to first ... that support ... Thanks for the clarification - it s harder for me to read that response as utterly cynical :-) Again
      Message 156 of 156 , Oct 27, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com, "Steven Gordon"
        <sgordonphd@...> wrote:
        >
        > On 10/26/07, igouy2 <igouy2@...> wrote:
        > >
        > > > The best way to convince yourself that TDD is (or is not)
        valuable is to
        > > > give it a legitimate try. The best way to convince others is
        to first
        > > > convince yourself. Then, it is natural to cite the studies
        that support
        > > > your educated opinion and explain away the ones that do not.
        > >
        > > You can fool most of the people most of the time?
        > >
        >
        > No, because the expectations that I set with any client is that what
        > matters is how well we can address their particular problems. How
        > things have worked in other contexts may lend some credence, but
        > ultimately do not matter.
        >
        > The game plan is to collaboratively decide what the few most critical
        > problems are, measure them, apply process change(s) that are
        > appropriate for those problems, remeasure, and repeat until the client
        > decides to stop (either because they can continue the process without
        > us or decide that the changes are causing more pain than the
        > improvements are worth). TDD may not be the appropriate remedy for
        > the most critical problems at a particular client, but it always
        > become an appropriate remedy at some point.
        >
        > The main reason I would cite academic studies is to provide client
        > decision makers comfort and CYA, not because I really believe that any
        > such studies could possibly be rigorously valid.

        Thanks for the clarification - it's harder for me to read that
        response as utterly cynical :-)

        Again without being cynical, it's not surprising to see developer
        testing case-studies labelled as test driven development - there isn't
        a buzzword for non-TDD developer testing.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.