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

RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: IEEE SWEBOK Is Looking for Reviewers--They Don't Even Mention XP, Agile, etc.

Expand Messages
  • Mike Cohn
    Interestingly, Andersen Consulting used to teach programming this way. I joined Andersen in 1986 as a C programmer. I spent about a year on a C and C++ project
    Message 1 of 37 , Jun 4, 2003
      Interestingly, Andersen Consulting used to teach programming this way. I
      joined Andersen in 1986 as a C programmer. I spent about a year on a C and
      C++ project before they realized I hadn't gone through their mandatory COBOL
      training. (I think this makes me the first person to ever learn COBOL after
      already working in C++!) I went for a 3-week COBOL training class outside
      Chicago and we were very definitely taught to write tests first. They were
      not automated tests, of course, but we had to write them before we were even
      allowed to submit code for compilation. After my 3-week immersion in COBOL I
      went back to C++ and back to my "bad habit" of writing code and then
      (sometimes) tests.

      Perhaps the COBOLers of the 1980s were onto something!

      --Mike

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Michael Feathers [mailto:mfeathers@...]
      Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 9:10 AM
      To: Fabian Ritzmann
      Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: IEEE SWEBOK Is Looking for
      Reviewers--They Don't Even Mention XP, Agile, etc.


      > When the first programming course in a CS curriculum uses Test Driven
      > Development, we'll be teaching programming as we should.
    • Mike Beedle
      ... From: Fabian Ritzmann [mailto:usefri@gmx.net] ... Oh, I don t know -- we are still sort of on topic. ... We call tests by the user acceptance tests or
      Message 37 of 37 , Jun 6, 2003
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Fabian Ritzmann [mailto:usefri@...]
        > Need to bring this back on topic for this list. :-)

        Oh, I don't know -- we are still sort of on topic.

        > --- Fabian Ritzmann <usefri@...> wrote:
        > XP as I understand it uses unit tests and system
        > tests, unit tests for unit testing and system tests for
        > whatever the users want to test, including quality
        > aspects like performance, reliability, etc.


        We call tests by the user "acceptance tests" or ATs.

        I think this is a valid definition across XP and
        Scrum but I don't know if other agile methods call
        them the same way.


        self wrote:
        > The combination is very powerful:
        >
        > * test as _specification_ from Test-First, and
        > * program as executable _specification_ from
        > functional programming
        >
        > Both strategies drive development more into the
        > quantifiable _what_ space, much more than worthless
        > "exhaustive requirements documents" or "models".
        >
        > Perhaps, this is what we need to concentrate in
        > software architecture -- in patterns that tell us
        > _what_ to program and that are executable,

        Fabian wrote:
        >The principle problem is that provable (and executable)
        >specifications don't help if the specification is wrong.
        >And we all know that specifications always change,
        >that's why we do Scrum or another Agile development
        >method. Of course that shouldn't keep anybody from
        >improving the way we are programming these days.

        True. In our view, the need for acceptance tests
        conducted through people-2-people interaction
        never goes away for the exact reasons you list
        (and regardless the programming styles used):

        - making sure that the specification is not wrong
        - making sure that we keep up with changes
        for the specification
        - making sure that the user experience is
        comfortable i.e. timely, convenient, beautiful, etc.

        It is just easier, faster and even more economical
        in some paradigms of programming to do the above
        3 things,

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