4 ms·
I would like to see the evidence for any of your claims. As far as I'm aware there is very little evidence for any productivity improvements related to programm
by noelwelsh 7y ago
I would like to see the evidence for any of your claims. As far as I'm aware there is very little evidence for any productivity improvements related to programming practice, mostly due to lack of high quality studies. It's my understanding that CS doesn't really do that kind of study, for a variety of reasons (primarily, I believe, coming from a mathematics not social science culture).
- pron 7y agoFirst of all, empirical verification is not only done through studies. Software is not particle physics, but one of the world's large industries, practiced by millions of practitioners every day. Some techniques/methodologies/practices have spread through the industry like wildfire -- the three I mentioned -- which is at least consistent with the hypothesis that they deliver value; so, to the extent that anything has had a positive effect I believe these three are pretty much the only contenders. It is possible that even I am too optimistic, but there is very unlikely at this point that I'm too pessimistic. Also, the claim that X has not had a large positive effect requires no evidence. It must be assumed true until proven otherwise; that's just the scientific method. The larger the claimed effect and the longer until it is detected -- especially in a selective environment -- the less likely it is real. However, the claim that something has had a big positive bottom-line effect and yet that effect is not detected in a selective environment that is known to have selected beneficial techniques all the time is false with a very high likelihood to the point of being self-contradictory.