4 ms·
> Software mistakes can be pretty dire Absolutely, but again, they don't happen as you're coding, unlike aviation or surgery. > if you want to ensure quality,
by cgrealy 7y ago
> Software mistakes can be pretty dire
Absolutely, but again, they don't happen as you're coding, unlike aviation or surgery.
> if you want to ensure quality, in practice, you will want different eyes to look at the code
Totally agree, but that's an argument for code review, not pair programming. PP is a way to do code review, but I'd argue it's not a very good way, since you're asking the authors to review the code.
> The easiest time to catch mistakes is early.
TDD and CI are a more effective way of doing this.
- jacques_chester 7y ago> Absolutely, but again, they don't happen as you're coding, unlike aviation or surgery. When do they occur? > PP is a way to do code review, but I'd argue it's not a very good way, since you're asking the authors to review the code. I'd argue that it is a good way, based on my experience of both methods. Code reviews are better than winging it, but given the choice between a PR-and-review process and pair programming with trunk development, I'd take the latter every time. I agree with the virtues of TDD and CI, I see pair programming as a useful way to help with TDD.
- cgrealy 7y ago> When do they occur? When the code is run, not when it’s written. > I'd argue that it is a good way, based on my experience of both methods. And with similar experience, I’d disagree. Paired programmers are focused on writing the code not reviewing. The whole point of code reviews is to let someone divorced from the problem solving process objectively the code.