3 ms·
I think what led to the religious zeal currently is that OO/mutable state programming is a house of cards. On a team, everybody can be a great coder, but just o
by DanielBMarkham 10y ago
I think what led to the religious zeal currently is that OO/mutable state programming is a house of cards. On a team, everybody can be a great coder, but just one bug can bring the whole thing down in a non-trivial manner. I'm guessing it was easier simply to say "TDD All The Things!" than try to split hairs and work with the nuance.
- dasmoth 10y agoThis seems to be anathema in some circles, but perhaps the team (in the abstract) is the problem here. Rather than bending over backwards to make software development team-friendly, might it make more sense to have individual module owners and well-defined interfaces between modules? (Trying to compartmentalise the mutable state wouldn't hurt, either...)
- keithnz 10y agowhat drove the religion was this rejection of the "Big Design Up Front" (BDUF). in 99, Rationals Unified Process ( RUP ) was seen as mind meld of best design advice and process ( in a so called process framework ) which advocated a phase of pure design using UML notation. Any notion of design up front was countered with TDD, and long talks about emergence :) I think it was a good counter balance and it brought in the age of quick feedback and continuous delivery.