Print Story Fun and games and fun
Diary
By Herring (Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 08:20:53 AM EST) (all tags)
and fun


Interesting theory propounded by a colleague of mine who I will refer to as Mr. S. (although his real surname is Sharma). Mr. S. contends that, whilst the rise of iterative and, indeed, agile methods may be good for software development productivity, they have been accompanied by a rise in beaurocracy - generally implemented by managers who "don't know fucking shit man" about these methods which has more than wiped out any possible gains. I am inclined to agree.

I am going on holiday (not by plane). We are going to France for two whole weeks so I should be able to give an informed opinion on whether it (France) is any good or not.

I probably wont be arsed with a diary tomorrow so I leave you with some games.

Today's Soduku:

Give the next two items in the following sequences:

  1. H T P B D B _ _
  2. V N S F C F _ _
  3. 9, 8, 24, 23, 17, _, _
Clues:
  1. This is quite sad and also debatable
  2. This is unbelievablely sad
  3. Possible the should insert 10 at the beginning. Very sad.
< See Those Eyes | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >
Fun and games and fun | 11 comments (11 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
wtf by cam (2.00 / 0) #1 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 08:22:47 AM EST
the agile methodologies are process limited methods designed to overcome the rigid and suffocating methodology of the waterfall and engineering methods where it wasnt necessary.

Agile has been a good thing.

cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic

Not when combined with soffocating management by Herring (2.00 / 0) #2 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 08:26:29 AM EST
who don't understand and still wander round with detailed Gannt charts that extend 18 months into the future.

I figure when it's just developer and user (in perfect harmony) then it's by definition agile. It jsut doesn't involve giong on an expensive course first.


christ, we're all old now - StackyMcRacky

[ Parent ]
the only purpose for process by cam (2.00 / 0) #10 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 10:28:38 AM EST
is to ensure a 'quality' outcome. If the costs to develop are higher than the quality that it is expected then the process is too rigourous and burdensome, if the quality of the delivered product is lower than expectations, and the process so cheap and open; then it is time to revisit the process itself to ensure quality outcomes.

Too much process means the software is going to cost too much. In most places the developers and those producing product ignore the process most of the time anyway and still manage to deliver quality product.

Which is why the bare minimum of process is always a winner.

cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic

[ Parent ]
Except by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #4 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 08:32:25 AM EST
When it's used as an excuse not to plan and to skip design.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
As someone who is employed to design full time by Herring (2.00 / 0) #5 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 08:41:35 AM EST
Most of it is a waste of time. By "most of it" I mean the time consuming task of producing the "evidence" that management need to see that you're doing something.

If your developers are intelligent, they can grasp the concepts and the overall picture based on far fewer diagrams. If your developers aren't intelligent, well you're fucked.

I have done some arithmetic on a recent task with a particularly un-gifted specimen. In the time I tooke to draw extra diagrams outlining unlikely scenarios, produce a neatly formatted document, hold 3 handover meetings, point to paragraphs in my neatly formatted document in answer to queries, I could've coded it myself 84 times over. I timed it. I'm not allowed to code though.

christ, we're all old now - StackyMcRacky

[ Parent ]
Currently by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #7 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 09:18:43 AM EST
I have the opposite problem. "I want a working prototype next week, I think it should do $X", followed by the same statement next week with a different value of $X.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
Agile is quality focused by cam (2.00 / 0) #9 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 10:25:51 AM EST
Basically its premise is, "the bare minimum amount of process to ensure a product which matches the customer's quality expectations."

In the case of software for the space shuttle, that is pretty high and the bare minimum is far more rigourous than 99.9% of software shops do. By the same token a lot of software developed in small shops requires day by day changes, so the quality expectations are lower and the process much more open and a case of, "Joe, can you add this?".

cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic

[ Parent ]
BTW by Herring (2.00 / 0) #3 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 08:29:11 AM EST
If reference to yesterday's poll, whoever voted for "one table per concrete class" is clearly wrong. That is just such a rubbish solution.

Take classes A (abstract) and B,C and D which inherit. How the fuck are you going to query "give me all the A derived classes" and still have some sort of unique ID? Silly person.

christ, we're all old now - StackyMcRacky

France by thunderbee (2.00 / 0) #6 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 09:16:16 AM EST
Where are you going?

France by Herring (2.00 / 0) #8 Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 09:23:41 AM EST
Brittany. Near Morlaix.  Not an area I know well. I love the Ardeche but I'm not sure I feel like embarking on such a long drive with les enfants on board. I suppose my parents did it - and without air conditioning. We'll see how it goes.

christ, we're all old now - StackyMcRacky
[ Parent ]
Nice place by bob6 (2.00 / 0) #11 Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:03:11 AM EST
British class weather. Try to take a look at the coast between Roscoff and Saint-Brieuc: it is worth the sight.

Cheers.
[ Parent ]
Fun and games and fun | 11 comments (11 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback