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

Re: [XP] Pair programming vs. Mentoring in a pair

Expand Messages
  • Ron Jeffries
    ... I felt this way on C3, trying to learn (and to a tiny extent invent) XP. It was great. I don t feel this way right now, for various reasons, and it s
    Message 1 of 79 , Apr 2, 2001
      Responding to Kenneth Tyler (09:47 PM 4/1/2001 -0700):
      >my dad once stopped in the middle of the day, looked around
      >and said...you know, i learn more now in a day sometimes than i used to
      >learn in a whole year

      I felt this way on C3, trying to learn (and to a tiny extent invent) XP. It
      was great. I don't feel this way right now, for various reasons, and it's
      bugging me. Should it? Do I have some responsibility to push myself to the
      edge, to perform at my highest capability every moment? Or is it OK to sit
      on the deck, look at the lake, and drive around in my neat little car?

      I guess it must surely be an individual decision how good to be in any
      area. A team can value the individual's feeling of self-worth so much that
      they cannot address the individual's very real opportunities to learn. Is
      that just another perfectly good way to be?

      Regards,

      Ronald E Jeffries
      http://www.XProgramming.com
      http://www.objectmentor.com
    • billy@psisys01.nrlssc.navy.mil
      ... Absolutely. If all a person got out of studying XP was unit testing, automated testing, and (especially) test-first programming, their productivity would
      Message 79 of 79 , Apr 9, 2001
        davechaplin@... wrote:

        > Responding to Ron Jeffries:
        > > Not in public. Anyone who has been around has seen teams differ by
        > > at least 10X, and probably has ideas as to why. I make no
        > > productivity claims for XP at all, at least not in terms of
        > > numbers. There's no way to know, AFAICS.

        > My personal experience is that by doing upfront testing and using
        > automated test harnesses you get a massive increase in productivity.
        > People spend more time building the new stuff, and less time fixing
        > what they have already apparently finished writing.

        Absolutely.

        If all a person got out of studying XP was unit testing, automated testing,
        and (especially) test-first programming, their productivity would almost
        have to improve.

        As far as "Silver Bullets" -- it seems that every year or so, there's a new
        methodology that promises to reduce defects, shorten delivery times,
        increase profits, and clean out that bottom left desk drawer that
        I'm afraid to look in anymore. One difference I see with XP is that
        although there *is* a coherent system, its elements (or at least some of
        them) are more or less decoupled. Certainly Continuous Testing,
        Simple Design, Refactoring, Continous Integration and the 40 hour week
        all stand on their own. In fact, I once thought I had invented
        Continuous testing/integration and Simple Design. I guess I should
        have written a book....

        --
        Billy Chambless
        Planning Systems Incorporated
        (228) 687-8745
        bchambless@...
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.