4 ms·

Do we really need to have another debate around development methodologies? I mean... it's getting to the point where I'd rather write COBOL to access SOAP webs

by j_baker 16y ago

Do we really need to have another debate around development methodologies? I mean... it's getting to the point where I'd rather write COBOL to access SOAP webservices using DOS on a 386 than read another article talking about how smart people don't need methodologies (especially if TDD is mentioned).

jamesbritt 16y ago
"Do we really need to have another debate around development methodologies?" Well, it's not really much of a debate when one side is bluntly asserting, for example: Good programmers will write good code regardless of whether or not they use TDD or not. ... without a shred of non-anecdotal evidence, or tossing up strawmen to be knocked down. Like this one: It becomes ridiculous when people start to think that this tool that may be useful to some is going to save us all from bad code and crappy software.
- mistermann 16y ago
  "without a shred of non-anecdotal evidence," Did you know, working software has existed for 30++ years, performing its job day after day, before TDD was conceived and marketed to the world? People might take TDD advocates a bit more seriously if they dropped this assertion that if you aren't using TDD, or even worse, if you're not even writing tests for your code, you are doomed! I've been writing code for well over 15 years without TDD, and I've never had a major problem with bugs or refactoring, because I think when I'm working, and anticipate future problems. Yet I have seen many young people come along with many different silver bullets to solve all out problems, and I've had to clean things up after they were done. This is not to say TDD is bad, and especially not to say testing is bad, I'm just saying, it is definitely not a panacea, and often not even necessary.
  - j_baker 16y ago
    Did you realize that people wrote working software for 10 years without high-level languages? Or that people wrote working software for 20-30 years without the web? How many working programs have been written without garbage collection? Approaches to programming improve over time. Yeah, people got by without TDD for 30+ years, but I'd much rather be a programmer today than 30+ years ago.
  - jamesbritt 16y ago
    "Did you know, working software has existed for 30++ years, performing its job day after day, before TDD was conceived and marketed to the world?" No, I did not. Thanks for that tidbit. To return the favor, here's another data point: Did you know, shitty software has existed for 30++ years, failing at its job day after day, before people were knocking TDD and its marketing to the world? That's right: there's been good and bad code for quite some time. Who wrote that bad code? Well, the assertion was that "[g]ood programmers will write good code", so it wasn't them. I find that an amazing claim, absent any evidence. At best, it's either tautological or a No True Scotsman sort of thing: anyone who ever wrote bad good is by definition not a good programmer. My own anecdotal evidence says that good programmers sometimes write bad good. Maybe not often, maybe not on purpose, but it happens. You code yourself into a corner; you make a bad guess on something. Just like great athletes have a bad game, or a great musicians an off gig. Let's suppose I'm over-interpreting the assertion. Suppose the claim was really meant to mean that good programmers will usually or typically write good code regardless of whether or not they use TDD or not. Well, that invites the awkward question of would they write good code more often using TDD? I think yes, but have no more of a data-backed argument for that than the article has against it. The existence of working code says nothing about whether good programmers always write good code regardless of TDD, or whether they would or would not write good code more often using TDD. "People might take TDD advocates a bit more seriously if they dropped this assertion that if you aren't using TDD, or even worse, if you're not even writing tests for your code, you are doomed!" People might take TDD critics a bit more seriously if they stopped trotting out shit like that because no one with an ounce of brains argues that, except perhaps to troll people into writing shrill blog posts.

by j_baker 16y ago

jamesbritt 16y ago

"Do we really need to have another debate around development methodologies?" Well, it's not really much of a debate when one side is bluntly asserting, for example: Good programmers will write good code regardless of whether or not they use TDD or not. ... without a shred of non-anecdotal evidence, or tossing up strawmen to be knocked down. Like this one: It becomes ridiculous when people start to think that this tool that may be useful to some is going to save us all from bad code and crappy software.

mistermann 16y ago
"without a shred of non-anecdotal evidence," Did you know, working software has existed for 30++ years, performing its job day after day, before TDD was conceived and marketed to the world? People might take TDD advocates a bit more seriously if they dropped this assertion that if you aren't using TDD, or even worse, if you're not even writing tests for your code, you are doomed! I've been writing code for well over 15 years without TDD, and I've never had a major problem with bugs or refactoring, because I think when I'm working, and anticipate future problems. Yet I have seen many young people come along with many different silver bullets to solve all out problems, and I've had to clean things up after they were done. This is not to say TDD is bad, and especially not to say testing is bad, I'm just saying, it is definitely not a panacea, and often not even necessary.
- j_baker 16y ago
  Did you realize that people wrote working software for 10 years without high-level languages? Or that people wrote working software for 20-30 years without the web? How many working programs have been written without garbage collection? Approaches to programming improve over time. Yeah, people got by without TDD for 30+ years, but I'd much rather be a programmer today than 30+ years ago.
- jamesbritt 16y ago
  "Did you know, working software has existed for 30++ years, performing its job day after day, before TDD was conceived and marketed to the world?" No, I did not. Thanks for that tidbit. To return the favor, here's another data point: Did you know, shitty software has existed for 30++ years, failing at its job day after day, before people were knocking TDD and its marketing to the world? That's right: there's been good and bad code for quite some time. Who wrote that bad code? Well, the assertion was that "[g]ood programmers will write good code", so it wasn't them. I find that an amazing claim, absent any evidence. At best, it's either tautological or a No True Scotsman sort of thing: anyone who ever wrote bad good is by definition not a good programmer. My own anecdotal evidence says that good programmers sometimes write bad good. Maybe not often, maybe not on purpose, but it happens. You code yourself into a corner; you make a bad guess on something. Just like great athletes have a bad game, or a great musicians an off gig. Let's suppose I'm over-interpreting the assertion. Suppose the claim was really meant to mean that good programmers will usually or typically write good code regardless of whether or not they use TDD or not. Well, that invites the awkward question of would they write good code more often using TDD? I think yes, but have no more of a data-backed argument for that than the article has against it. The existence of working code says nothing about whether good programmers always write good code regardless of TDD, or whether they would or would not write good code more often using TDD. "People might take TDD advocates a bit more seriously if they dropped this assertion that if you aren't using TDD, or even worse, if you're not even writing tests for your code, you are doomed!" People might take TDD critics a bit more seriously if they stopped trotting out shit like that because no one with an ounce of brains argues that, except perhaps to troll people into writing shrill blog posts.