Re: XP and Pair Programming

H. S. Lahman wrote:

> While I agree that there is no free lunch and reviewer effort is
> significant, especially in aggregate, I can't agree with the 1:1 metric
> per reviewer. It is much easier to critique something with intellectual
> content that already exists than it is to create it. I've reviewed specs,
> models, and code that took days or weeks to create with a few hours effort
> on my part.

I'm very good at pairing and I suck at that kind of reviewing.

Does that say I'm incompetent to review? or that reviewing is a
diversity-challenged technique?

I drift off. I get bored. And I won't delay reviewing by asking the most
important question: This code is nice _statically_, but what's its _dynamic_
profile? Show me how to change it along its OCP boundaries? What new tests
would I write? Could I simplify it, to bring it closer to its ideal?

Then such reviewing also denies my opportunities to improve its bug
resistance. This opens the question "where did those weeks go?"

--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.org/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!


.