Re: [extremeprogramming] The principle behind How Test-Driven Development Works

J.B.,

 From my point of view the article communicates very well as it is. 
Perhaps adding a URL to queuing theory would help, but I worry that 
trying to make this article into "all things for all people" will lose 
the clarity and colloquial feel in favor of precision. That would be 
sad, as I like to send people to this article.

  - George

On 11/18/19 3:25 PM, J. B. Rainsberger wrote:
> The mathematics of the argument don't matter as much as the 
> self-similarity of the argument. When they see Waterfall turn into Lean 
> Startup, it's hard to argue against the value of incorporating feedback.
> 
> What about the math literally argues for top-down pre-design? I've never 
> seen that argument.
> 
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 3:43 PM Steve Gordon <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>     If your audience gets OO programming, a few good TDD session makes
>     dynamic KISS compelling, especially on whatever they are currently
>     working on
> 
>     If your audience does not get OO programming, all the compelling
>     mathematical arguments in the world won't stick after they leave the
>     room (or put down the article).  In practice, they will still fall
>     back to planning the whole thing out the first time they find
>     themselves doing any rework.
> 
>     I love a good mathematical explanation (having a math degree and
>     having many times taught all the math courses in the CS curriculum),
>     but the math literally argues for top-down pre-design when I know in
>     my heart that effective software development is dynamic because it
>     is about human interaction, not the math.
> 
>     On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 7:25 AM J. B. Rainsberger
>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>         On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 3:09 PM Steve Gordon
>         <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>             Beware that in the hands of rigid thinkers, this kind of
>             thinking can easily lead to Gant charts, critical chains,
>             critical paths, and other forms of over-planning.
> 
> 
>         I understand your impulse, but I'm not worried about that. And
>         it hasn't happened in the past 10 years. :)
> 
>         The whole point of the article is to show the exact opposite:
>         that small-batch rework is the antidote to the statistical
>         fluctuations and that's why TDD works. When I give the
>         corresponding talk, I turn the "Waterfall" diagram into an
>         something similar to http://www.zeroplayer.com/tdd.png in a
>         handful of iterations of the applying this idea.
> 
>             Keep things dynamic and simple.  TDD with good unit test
>             coverage facilitates just doing things in whatever order the
>             user story slices and their priorities lead. 
> 
> 
>         If my audience had found that compelling, I wouldn't have
>         invented anything else. :)
>         -- 
>         J. B. (Joe) Rainsberger :: https://tdd.training ::
>         http://www.jbrains.ca :: http://www.thecodewhisperer.com
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> J. B. (Joe) Rainsberger :: https://tdd.training :: http://www.jbrains.ca 
> :: http://www.thecodewhisperer.com
> 
> 

-- 
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
   * George Dinwiddie *                      http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
   Software Development                    http://www.idiacomputing.com
   Consultant and Coach
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#160258): https://groups.io/g/extremeprogramming/message/160258
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/39414677/2417047
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/extremeprogramming/leave/4902963/619838065/xyzzy  [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-