Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Robert C. Martin <unclebob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 12:42:08 -0500
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 08:00:08 -0400, "Daniel Parker"
<danielaparker@spam?nothanks.windupbird.com> wrote:
>I think the criticism is of writing which is largely polemical, and I think
>it would be fair to put much of the writing by XP proponents in this
>category. A good test would be to check whether the author treats XP as if
>it were the one and only methodology that has no problems, and a good number
>of articles on the subject appear to fall into this category.
Does it? Oh I agree that there are some over-enthusiastic blurbs
written here and there. But where are the serious articles and books
that treat XP as a discipline that has no problems? Certainly the
primary XP books don't fall into that category. Nor do the articles
by the original proponents. While I would agree that there have been
certain excesses of enthusiasm amongst the original proponents (and I
have been as guilty as any), none of us has claimed silver-bullet
status for XP/Agile.
>It's hard to
>find blogs that dissect both successful and unsuccessful XP projects and
>systematically discuss the consequences of the various practices, which is
>what you'd expect if the author wanted to be taken seriously.
I'm astounded. There has been a rather large amount of critical and
thoughtful writing about XP/Agile in the magazines and newsgroups.
Folks have tried it this way and that, and have commented on how the
practices apply to them and their situations. Whole books have been
published with the research data on certain practices.
> Instead, you
>get pictures of happy programmers on the cover of Software Development
>magazine, links to projects that seem to go dead after a while, and links to
>puff pieces.
You also get links to projects that are succeeding and continue to
succeed, as well as articles in Dr. Dobbs about the problems of
XP/Agile, and links to critical and thoughtful discussions on many
blogs and newsgroups.
>None of this is anti-XP; it's just that evangelical writing
>tends to come across as a little bit silly when presented to a professional
>audience.
So does anti-writing; especially when it isn't based on any kind of
facts.
-----
Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob) | email: unclebob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Object Mentor Inc. | blog: www.butunclebob.com
The Agile Transition Experts | web: www.objectmentor.com
800-338-6716
"The aim of science is not to open the door to infinite wisdom,
but to set a limit to infinite error."
-- Bertolt Brecht, Life of Galileo
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Phlip
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- References:
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: krasicki
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Michael Feathers
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: krasicki
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Nick Malik [Microsoft]
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: krasicki
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Nick Malik [Microsoft]
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Robert C . Martin
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Daniel Parker
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- Prev by Date: Re: Question regarding OOP and database access
- Next by Date: Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- Previous by thread: Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- Next by thread: Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|