Extreme Pair Programming - Guy Steele and Richard Stallman

Re:Extreme Pair Programming - Guy Steele and Richard Stallman by billmcneale on Tuesday September 14, 2010 @10:13PM (#1693060)

>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.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Extreme Pair Programming - Guy Steele and Richard Stallman by rsbrown on Tuesday September 14, 2010 @11:40PM (#1693231)

"There's no credible evidence to support that claim."

My experience supports it. Can you point to credible evidence to support your claim?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Extreme Pair Programming - Guy Steele and Richard Stallman by silentbicycle on Wednesday September 15, 2010 @06:28AM (#1693819)

And 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.

[ Parent | on HN ]