2 ms·

>somehow thinking before doing got a bad rap recently (for reasons beyond me). I've seen plenty of software devs engage in detailed forward planning for a futu

by pydry 4y ago

>somehow thinking before doing got a bad rap recently (for reasons beyond me). I've seen plenty of software devs engage in detailed forward planning for a future that would be utterly different from what they expected. Best case this rendered all that forward planning moot and a waste of time. Medium case is they did a lot of pointless work. Worst case they technologically straitjacketed themselves and dug multiple holes they couldnt extricate themselves from easily. Then they'd pick themselves up and do it all over again thinking that if they (or more usually somebody else) just managed to predict the future better then this kind of shit wouldnt happen. E.g. those idiot PMs just need to provide better requirements. It's a hard rut to get out of because in so many other spheres of life forward upfront planning is critical and the future IS predictable. Software intuitively feels like it should be too. But it's the exact fucking opposite of that. This is, at least, why certain kinds of thinking before doing got a bad rap with me.

Dudeman112 4y ago
Sounds like a problem with the execution instead of the technique. The alternative to thinking before doing is wandering aimlessly, which really isn't likely to steer you where you want to be. We basically developed whole-ass treatises (and some unhealthy cargo cults) around people saying that the observe -> think -> do -> restart loop should be small and leave space for adjustments between each step.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  > The alternative to thinking before doing is wandering aimlessly, which really isn't likely to steer you where you want to be. When I was a kid, we topped over this hill on the interstate, and way down in the distance there was an overpass across the road, with straight road from here to there. And I wondered how my dad could aim the car so well that it would go under that overpass way off in the distance. Of course, now I know that he didn't do that. He didn't even try to do that. Instead, he steered the car. The alternative to thinking before doing is not wandering aimlessly. It's steering. It's knowing where you're trying to go, even if you don't exactly know how to get there, and having an initial idea of how to get there, and then starting to go there, and adjusting as you find obstacles that you didn't know existed, and as you find that your aim was off.

by pydry 4y ago

Dudeman112 4y ago

Sounds like a problem with the execution instead of the technique. The alternative to thinking before doing is wandering aimlessly, which really isn't likely to steer you where you want to be. We basically developed whole-ass treatises (and some unhealthy cargo cults) around people saying that the observe -> think -> do -> restart loop should be small and leave space for adjustments between each step.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
> The alternative to thinking before doing is wandering aimlessly, which really isn't likely to steer you where you want to be. When I was a kid, we topped over this hill on the interstate, and way down in the distance there was an overpass across the road, with straight road from here to there. And I wondered how my dad could aim the car so well that it would go under that overpass way off in the distance. Of course, now I know that he didn't do that. He didn't even try to do that. Instead, he steered the car. The alternative to thinking before doing is not wandering aimlessly. It's steering. It's knowing where you're trying to go, even if you don't exactly know how to get there, and having an initial idea of how to get there, and then starting to go there, and adjusting as you find obstacles that you didn't know existed, and as you find that your aim was off.