5 ms·

Step 1) Don't read a article without any empirical evidence or control group to support opinionated rules.

moneymakersucks 9y ago
Linked FTA, book about software dev based on empirical studies https://www.amazon.com/Making-Software-Really-Works-Believe/dp/0596808321/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ll1&tag=chrimaiospo06-20&linkId=84b7d672a6bbc66f55547d8208526ef2 https://www.amazon.com/Making-Software-Really-Works-Believe/...
- hackits 9y ago
  Lovely book (Read it cover to cover a couple of times) and a step in the right direction for the Software field.
dasil003 9y ago
Agree about random articles, but disagree about empirical evidence. Software engineering at the code level is a craft, not a science. I don't have time to wait around for empirical evidence to land, and when it does, it's likely to be invalid because the experiment environment can not possibly represent the diversity of environments in the real world. I don't need data to tell me how to run a team, I need people who can discuss their experience like grownups and reach a palatable consensus on how to operate and then get on with it.
- hackits 9y ago
  I would have to disagree with you. Software [Engineering] is a science you just treat it like a craft.
  - effie 9y ago
    Development of software is not science. Mathematical work on algorithm could be called science, in the sense 'mathematics', but very little part of programmers' work involves such mathematical thinking.
  - dasil003 9y ago
    I'm sorry, but you are deluding yourself. Like many technical people you take comfort in objectivity, but science is expensive and require stable foundations. You need something as unyielding as the laws of physics to make real scientific progress, and even then things get really messy fast when you look at things like nutrition where variables are difficult to isolate and experiments hard to design. Look at the trouble Economics has being taken seriously as a science. Now consider how fast hardware/software moves compared to economic change. Software engineering methodology is not tractable to science, there is no signal, only noise. If you disagree, don't blame it on me, show me the results and how you apply them.
TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
This is pretty much sums up why software development is - let's be polite - not quite as streamlined as it could be. CS has far too many clever people passing off random opinions and preferences as Best Practices, and far too little empirical testing of anything anyone recommends or does.

Linked FTA, book about software dev based on empirical studies https://www.amazon.com/Making-Software-Really-Works-Believe/dp/0596808321/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ll1&tag=chrimaiospo06-20&linkId=84b7d672a6bbc66f55547d8208526ef2 https://www.amazon.com/Making-Software-Really-Works-Believe/...

hackits 9y ago
Lovely book (Read it cover to cover a couple of times) and a step in the right direction for the Software field.

dasil003 9y ago

Agree about random articles, but disagree about empirical evidence. Software engineering at the code level is a craft, not a science. I don't have time to wait around for empirical evidence to land, and when it does, it's likely to be invalid because the experiment environment can not possibly represent the diversity of environments in the real world. I don't need data to tell me how to run a team, I need people who can discuss their experience like grownups and reach a palatable consensus on how to operate and then get on with it.

hackits 9y ago
I would have to disagree with you. Software [Engineering] is a science you just treat it like a craft.
- effie 9y ago
  Development of software is not science. Mathematical work on algorithm could be called science, in the sense 'mathematics', but very little part of programmers' work involves such mathematical thinking.
- dasil003 9y ago
  I'm sorry, but you are deluding yourself. Like many technical people you take comfort in objectivity, but science is expensive and require stable foundations. You need something as unyielding as the laws of physics to make real scientific progress, and even then things get really messy fast when you look at things like nutrition where variables are difficult to isolate and experiments hard to design. Look at the trouble Economics has being taken seriously as a science. Now consider how fast hardware/software moves compared to economic change. Software engineering methodology is not tractable to science, there is no signal, only noise. If you disagree, don't blame it on me, show me the results and how you apply them.

TheOtherHobbes 9y ago

This is pretty much sums up why software development is - let's be polite - not quite as streamlined as it could be. CS has far too many clever people passing off random opinions and preferences as Best Practices, and far too little empirical testing of anything anyone recommends or does.