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

Re: [XP] Re: Direct evidence, XP reduces the cost-of-change curve...

Expand Messages
  • Jiva DeVoe
    ... Because though the *design* was flawed, it s functionality was not, with the exception of the fact that it didn t scale to our new needs, nor was it as
    Message 1 of 32 , May 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 02:02:42PM -0000, Lee wrote:
      >
      > > But, all of this is not the truly impressive part. Last week, as we
      > > were reviewing things, we discovered a serious design flaw in the
      > > system which went back, clear to the VERY first modules we wrote
      > > way-back-when we started. These modules were absolutely CORE to the
      > > rest of the system, and were used in several other modules VERY
      > > intimately. BUT... we decided... it had to go.
      >
      > === How then can you explain the modules passing the units tests if
      > they had a serious flaw? Secondly, would this flaw have been
      > missed if you doing 100% pair programming???? What about the
      > process of refactoring? Wouldn't this too have surfaced the flaw?

      Because though the *design* was flawed, it's functionality was not,
      with the exception of the fact that it didn't scale to our new needs,
      nor was it as fast as we ultimately needed it to be. It *was* in fact
      through the process of refactoring that the flaw was surfaced. We had
      a "bad smell" which needed to be removed ASAP. All of this code was
      pair-programmed originally.

      >
      >
      > > We paired for some of the day, and worked alone during other
      > parts. We also did NOT write *as many* *new* tests as we should have
      > that day. We did write some, but not as many as we could have. We're
      > fixing the latter there this week. However, I just wanted to share
      > that with you guys as some PROOF that actually doing these things DOES
      > reduce the cost of later changes.
      >
      > === Pair programming is essential as is writing tests before coding.
      > While some of your practices implemented portions of XP, I'm not
      > quite certain the full intent of XP was implemented in your
      > project. You admittedly did some NON-pair programming, which lends
      > me to believe that refactoring also did not occur. The fact
      > that your newly developed passed tests is great, but is also
      > suspect since there were not an equal proportion of new tests
      > developed for the new code being written.
      >

      No, our *previously* developed tests passed in ADDITION to our new
      tests. Yes, we also refactored. Pair-programming != refactoring. I
      would agree that we didn't do this new code *completely* XP, but it is
      only because we had the previous support of the XP infrastructure we
      had already built that we were able to do what we did.

      > On a different note, some of the data you provide does lend some
      > added credibility to the XP process and its overall
      > effectiveness. I'm sure the community thanks you for the
      > information.
      >
      > Lee in Las Vegas
      >
      >
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      >
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      >
      > Don't miss XP UNIVERSE, the first US conference on XP and Agile Methods. Early registration discounts EXTENDED until May 1, 2001. www.xpuniverse.com for details and registration.
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >

      --
    • Ron Jeffries
      ... You didn t get it from me, son ... Ronald E Jeffries http://www.XProgramming.com http://www.objectmentor.com
      Message 32 of 32 , May 3, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Responding to azami@... (11:23 PM 5/3/2001 +0000):

        >Or I'm just contrarian because there's some French blood in me...

        You didn't get it from me, son ...

        Ronald E Jeffries
        http://www.XProgramming.com
        http://www.objectmentor.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.