Extreme Programming

[Craig]

Does anybody have anything positive to say about this ?

[SunWuKong]

what is it? :confused:

[Andrew]

You got me beat. I used to use paper tape though.

[Craig]

Originally posted by SunWuKung@Dec 25 2002, 01:43 AM
what is it? :confused:
A software development methodology that seems to be gaining some momentum.

http://www.extremeprogramming.org/

http://www.xprogramming.com/

http://www.xp2002.org/

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Craig@Dec 25 2002, 02:10 AM
A software development methodology that seems to be gaining some momentum.

http://www.extremeprogramming.org/

http://www.xprogramming.com/

http://www.xp2002.org/
hmmm interesting... but actually i think most of the methodology is already applied, except for one major rule - move people around. i think companies are reluctant to do that because there's always a learning curb when you move people to new code. i'm not so sure about this rule because it could potentially cause a lot of slowdown, especially when you're in a big project.

[Craig]

Originally posted by SunWuKung@Dec 25 2002, 02:25 AM
hmmm interesting... but actually i think most of the methodology is already applied, except for one major rule - move people around. i think companies are reluctant to do that because there's always a learning curb when you move people to new code. i'm not so sure about this rule because it could potentially cause a lot of slowdown, especially when you're in a big project.
I think what extreme programming represents is too commonplace. Just because this is the way things are being done in places, doesn't justify it as a good process. I am worried about a perceived legitimization of bad software development practices further permeating the industry.

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Craig@Dec 25 2002, 02:32 AM
I think what extreme programming represents is too commonplace. Just because this is the way things are being done in places, doesn't justify it as a good process. I am worried about a perceived legitimization of bad software development practices further permeating the industry.
well i'm more concerned about the cost-effectiveness of "extreme programming". i mean most of the time you can't afford to follow a methodology exactly. it just doesn't happen.

[ism]

It's unfortunate it's a buzzword, as it can be useful in certain circumstances, but PHBs will probably utilize it incorrectly. It turns out I've been involved in XP in certain respects without knowing it. I think certain requirements need to be fulfilled for XP to be successful. The people involved must be uberprogrammers and cannot have a primadonna complex, the design/requirements must be set in stone and fully understood, the project manager should have a large degree of control over the process.

In a past project I was the core lead and pumping out code like crazy. Nothing really wrong with that. When I brought one of the other programmers in on the core action, it helped in several respects. The code was a lot cleaner, and this programmer understood how the core engine worked, which helped when he coded the stuff that depended on the engine. We lost man hours while working together but I believe we regained them in the long run.

Honestly, I wish it were called something else because it brings about images of snowboarders jumping from helicopters.

[Craig]

Originally posted by ism@Dec 25 2002, 02:59 AM
It's unfortunate it's a buzzword, as it can be useful in certain circumstances, but PHBs will probably utilize it incorrectly.  It turns out I've been involved in XP in certain respects without knowing it.  I think certain requirements need to be fulfilled for XP to be successful.  The people involved must be uberprogrammers and cannot have a primadonna complex, the design/requirements must be set in stone and fully understood, the project manager should have a large degree of control over the process.  

In a past project I was the core lead and pumping out code like crazy.  Nothing really wrong with that.  When I brought one of the other programmers in on the core action, it helped in several respects.  The code was a lot cleaner, and this programmer understood how the core engine worked, which helped when he coded the stuff that depended on the engine.  We lost man hours while working together but I believe we regained them in the long run.

Honestly, I wish it were called something else because it brings about images of snowboarders jumping from helicopters.

I was under the impression that XP was more aimed at the anti-uberprogrammer and was trying to sell itself on its flexibility when issues like requirements are fluid and design virtually nonexistant.

So, were you following the idea of pair programming ? Would this have really been any better than good effective team communication and documentation ?

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by ism@Dec 25 2002, 02:59 AM
the design/requirements must be set in stone
HAHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHAH!!!


ok sorry... :P

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Craig@Dec 25 2002, 03:11 AM
So, were you following the idea of pair programming ? Would this have really been any better than good effective team communication and documentation ?
eh... it basically chops up the project into mini projects for teams of two. i don't think it's necessarily that much better, but sometimes it really does help to have another pair of eyes when debugging.

[ism]

Originally posted by Craig@Dec 25 2002, 03:11 AM
I was under the impression that XP was more aimed at the anti-uberprogrammer and was trying to sell itself on its flexibility when issues like requirements are fluid and design virtually nonexistant.

So, were you following the idea of pair programming ? Would this have really been any better than good effective team communication and documentation ?
XP as a whole may be aimed at the average programmer. I didn't actually read anything about XP until long after that project. What I meant by uberprogrammer is someone who has a good grasp of coding and wants to be an even better coder. In terms of pair programming, the overlap of the pair's domains may clash, and that needs to be resolved quickly, but where there are gaps in knowledge that can be filled, the other needs to be receptive to them. This also follows with collective ownership, in that both know the code intimately and either could refactor it. In terms of being better than comm and doc, it's definitely not a replacement but I think it enhances it greatly.