3 ms·
>If you measure productivity more like "features delivered per month" (and negatively adjust for bugs that make it to production) I contend that pair programmin
by billmcneale 16y ago
>If you measure productivity more like "features delivered per month" (and negatively adjust for bugs that make it to production) I contend that pair programming will probably yield more favorable numbers.
There's no credible evidence to support that claim.
On the other hand, pair programming generates a lot of churn (discussions about details between the pair programmers, the outcome of which bears little consequence on the solution of the problem) and that alone is guaranteed to negate whatever gain you could expect from pair programming.
In my experience, asynchronous code reviews work a lot better.
- rsbrown 16y ago"There's no credible evidence to support that claim." My experience supports it. Can you point to credible evidence to support your claim?
- silentbicycle 16y agoAnd my experience contradicts it. So what? The burden of proof is on the people claiming that it's more productive to do pair programming all the time, rather than just doing code reviews, collaborating when you need it, and otherwise not cutting your team in half. eXtreme claims require extreme proof.