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

Re: Ways XP is broken

Expand Messages
  • Phlip
    ... High feedback creates a compass needle that points at your worse problem. If that worse problem is outside the programming lab, you are screwed. There is
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Jim Shore wrote:


      > I see three ways XP is broken. Customer practices, company interface,
      > and legacy code:
      >
      > 1) XP provides a lot of support for programmers in the way of detailed
      > coding practices. It provides good support for planning. It has
      > virtually no support for the customer. I'd like to see practices that
      > help guide the XP customer in his (or her) job.

      High feedback creates a compass needle that points at your worse problem. If
      that worse problem is outside the programming lab, you are screwed. There is
      no "Refactor the Customers" practice.

      The biggest problems I have seen are executives who don't want customers,
      and executives who fear programmers communicating directly with customers.
      High feedback reveals both situations quickly.

      > 3) XP works because it creates a codebase with unique properties. Many
      > of us work with legacy code. I'd like to see XP address working with
      > legacy code. Maybe that means saying "vanilla XP won't work; use the
      > modified coding practices of LXP (legacy XP) instead."

      Mike Feathers is writing /Working Effectively with Legacy Code/; its mailing
      list is welc.

      I suspect he uses the Agile definition of "legacy" - code without tests.

      If you obey the rules "capture bugs with tests", and "test driven
      development", then they apply to the change, not to the function. The only
      healthy way to attack legacy code is via tests.

      However, we test to reduce risk. Adding tests to untestable code adds risk -
      meaning poor estimates, regressions, etc. So each foray into legacy modules
      requires a scheduled time, up-front, to work only to defeat that risk, and
      add a test rig.

      Here I either re-write, or write tests to copy each function one by one into
      another folder with a test rig. Or, if the cost-benefit ratio is lower (or
      if legacy programmers must also maintain that code), I add the tests as a
      module to the debug-mode version of the program. The program starts and
      warms up all its top-level object, then the tests operate on these.

      This reinforces all the coupling we fear, but its main benefit is it has the
      lowest risk profile.

      Write new modules for those apps test-first, and decoupled from main().

      > I also think XP needs to say more about the role of testers/QA and
      > project management. (There's lots of interesting stuff happening the
      > testers arena, fortunately.) I'd also like more about what happens
      > during deployment.

      Customer Acceptance Tests are a major thrust of research these days. The
      White Book treated them anecdotally, but we are now learning they are a
      whole new kind of user interface. Teams deploy them so the maximum number of
      people can author tests in them.

      --
      Phlip
    • Ron Jeffries
      ... Pointers to writings or sayings, please? Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump, on the back of his
      Message 2 of 4 , Nov 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        On Saturday, November 1, 2003, at 9:57:19 AM, Phlip wrote:

        > Customer Acceptance Tests are a major thrust of research these days.

        Pointers to writings or sayings, please?

        Ron Jeffries
        www.XProgramming.com
        Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump, on the back
        of his head. It is, as far as he knows, the only way of coming downstairs,
        but sometimes he feels that there really is another way, if only he could
        stop bumping for a moment and think of it. And then he feels that perhaps
        there isn't. -- A. A. Milne
      • Phlip
        ... http://fitnesse.org At least I thought that s what FIT s for... -- Phlip
        Message 3 of 4 , Nov 1, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          > > Customer Acceptance Tests are a major thrust of research these days.
          >
          > Pointers to writings or sayings, please?

          http://fitnesse.org

          At least I thought that's what FIT's for...

          --
          Phlip
        • Ron Jeffries
          ... Yes. I was thinking research would mean articles, studies, etc. FIT is good. Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com Prediction is very difficult, especially
          Message 4 of 4 , Nov 1, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            On Saturday, November 1, 2003, at 10:18:04 AM, Phlip wrote:

            >> > Customer Acceptance Tests are a major thrust of research these days.
            >>
            >> Pointers to writings or sayings, please?

            > http://fitnesse.org

            > At least I thought that's what FIT's for...

            Yes. I was thinking "research" would mean articles, studies, etc.

            FIT is good.

            Ron Jeffries
            www.XProgramming.com
            Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future. -- Niels Bohr
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.