News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Acephalic Agile: Worse than Waterfall? by wink on Thursday May 17, 2018 @06:24PM (#17096615)
I think this falls flat in terms of imagination.

Look at a building shell, even if you have zero clue about houses you can see if they used rotten wood. It looks like it will become a house. The more it progresses.. well, you can easily tell "that door shouldn't be where it is" and so on.

Now look at the code generated by $framework via "$tool new project $name". To a non-coder (or even just not using that language) it's not really discernible from a 90% finished product. Your house doesn't turn invisible because looked at it from the back.

Also house construction follows certain "easy" patterns a 5 year old can grasp - you need to start at the bottom, you can't put the paint on before the walls are in, etc.pp - give a coder of 10 years a project in another language without documentation and you won't hear anything in the direction of "it's more 10% or 80%" unless spending days. I'm not saying people building houses have an easier job - but it's palpable.

Re:Acephalic Agile: Worse than Waterfall? by TheCoelacanth on Thursday May 17, 2018 @09:06PM (#17097796)
It is not remotely that simple to tell if a house is a bad one. That is why people almost always get a professional inspection before they buy one.
Re:Acephalic Agile: Worse than Waterfall? by davidkhess on Thursday May 17, 2018 @06:37PM (#17096721)
To the first concern - that’s why I recommend you deliver (ideally) weekly intermediate builds of the product to the end user. Typically an underlying issue will begin to surface pretty rapidly.

To the second concern, first, let’s get on the same page. When I use the home analogy it’s in regards to a custom home - not a from-plan/spec home. To your point, I believe well developed software should also have strong and obvious patterns that are reused in many if not all other projects.