Re: XP and Pair Programming


Phlip wrote:
> Daniel Parker wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Ah, the clarity of agenda-oriented speculation, uncluttered by any kind of
> evidence.
>
> Try this:
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=%22pair+programming%22
>
> The search returns about 86,000 hits.
>
No agenda, just casual empiricism. Perhaps a better indicator would be
to take a straw vote on a few of the comp programming newsgroups and
take a count.

Regards,
Daniel Parker

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: XP and Pair Programming
    ... Daniel Parker wrote: ... > 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 ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: XP Requirement Analysis?
    ... Daniel Parker wrote: ... he posts a lot) on pair programming not always been mandatory. ... RCM said that not every single line of code might need a pair! ...
    (comp.object)