Re: XP and Pair Programming


Phlip wrote:
> Christopher Barber wrote:
>
> > Yes, I understand that. I am still not convinced that even in the long
> > run that pairing will be more cost effective than some other strategy.
>
> I'm not convinced that soloing will be more cost effective...
>
The only thing we can say for sure is that pair programming does not
seem to be catching on, it appears to be no more popular today than
five years ago, perhaps even less so.

Regards,
Daniel Parker

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: XP and Pair Programming
    ... Christopher Barber wrote: ... > run that pairing will be more cost effective than some other strategy. ... Phlip ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
    ... Phlip wrote: ... > Daniel Parker wrote: ... >> He's made the claim in a number of postings, sometimes more strongly, ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Test first as specification
    ... Phlip wrote: ... > Don't you see, Ilja? ... Daniel Parker ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Use Case Level of Detail
    ... That goal efficiently right-sizes the amount of analysis required to write ... tested code. ... Phlip ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Application logic and Business logic
    ... "Phlip" wrote in message ... >> If you're wondering why RCM, Phlip, Novoa, Lahman, Jeffries et al ... >> particpants of this newsgoup have changed their mind about much over ... > Daniel Parker has not changed opinions in that time period ...
    (comp.object)