Mob programming
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
Work out?, you seriously expect it to work out?
"Coming soon"
-
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
Work out?, you seriously expect it to work out?
"Coming soon"
It's like in Warhammer when the Orcs drive a battle wagon. You need at least three, two younger ones and an older, more experienced one. The older one drives while the other two fight over who gets to drive. And red ones always are fasta.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns. -
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
I'd be bored rigid. Watching someone else type is one of the most tedious jobs on the planet. I guess it would get entertaining when the 1TB fan types and the K&R devotee tries to tell him what he's doing wrong, and as for Mr
varmeeting the Hungarian namer I would have to bring popcorn. And bandages, obviously - but mostly popcorn.Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
I do not even touch the keyboard if someone stands behind me quietly... No way of pair (or mob!) programming with me... Do you want to exchange ideas - write it down or invite me to meeting... Do you want to do some code review/improvements to my code - you are welcome by all means...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
Back in high school, when using a Commodore PET at a friends house, we would take turns working on code, but not exactly 'pair' programming or 'mob'. One of us would start writing code for 15 minutes or so, then walk away. The next person would have to come in, read what was written, and proceed. After 15 minutes or so, swap out again. There was never any dialogue, no discussion as to what was planned... just try to figure out based on what you were doing, did they understand and continue building or do you have to move forward with their design as best you can... The results were amusing.
-
I'd be bored rigid. Watching someone else type is one of the most tedious jobs on the planet. I guess it would get entertaining when the 1TB fan types and the K&R devotee tries to tell him what he's doing wrong, and as for Mr
varmeeting the Hungarian namer I would have to bring popcorn. And bandages, obviously - but mostly popcorn.Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
OriginalGriff wrote:
Watching someone else type is one of the most tedious jobs on the planet.
Can't argue wit :zzz: :zzz: :zzz:
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
I can understand if you're mocking a UI up, or tweaking a workflow, or working through something like a database schema. You have all those invested sit in a room, you slap together some models, mockups, some diagrams or whatever and talk through the use cases and design until everyone's good to go. But then everyone leaves so the dev can actually get the work done.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
I can understand if you're mocking a UI up, or tweaking a workflow, or working through something like a database schema. You have all those invested sit in a room, you slap together some models, mockups, some diagrams or whatever and talk through the use cases and design until everyone's good to go. But then everyone leaves so the dev can actually get the work done.
cheers Chris Maunder
Chris Maunder wrote:
But then everyone leaves so the dev can actually get the work done.
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
-
I can understand if you're mocking a UI up, or tweaking a workflow, or working through something like a database schema. You have all those invested sit in a room, you slap together some models, mockups, some diagrams or whatever and talk through the use cases and design until everyone's good to go. But then everyone leaves so the dev can actually get the work done.
cheers Chris Maunder
Is it a bad sign when the devs are the first to run out the door?
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns. -
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
Sounds like the typical development shop - 1/2 written specs, lets get coding! :)
Charlie Gilley <italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape... "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783 “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
It sounds like a golfer, his caddy, and a couple of commentators... :wtf: Caddy: I think this calls for a
foreachloop. Golfer: Not for something this critical; hand me theforloop. Commentator 1: Interesting choice there, Bob, what do you think? Commentator 2: Well, Bob, he's had good success with theforloop before and he tends to shank theforeach, so this should be a good call. -
Sounds like the typical development shop - 1/2 written specs, lets get coding! :)
Charlie Gilley <italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape... "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783 “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
charlieg wrote:
1/2 written specs
I like your optimism! Marc
Latest Article - Create a Dockerized Python Fiddle Web App Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
I'd love to know what tools they use to streamline that process, particularly if they're developing a website! :rolleyes: Marc
Latest Article - Create a Dockerized Python Fiddle Web App Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
-
Back in high school, when using a Commodore PET at a friends house, we would take turns working on code, but not exactly 'pair' programming or 'mob'. One of us would start writing code for 15 minutes or so, then walk away. The next person would have to come in, read what was written, and proceed. After 15 minutes or so, swap out again. There was never any dialogue, no discussion as to what was planned... just try to figure out based on what you were doing, did they understand and continue building or do you have to move forward with their design as best you can... The results were amusing.
Yeah I remember those days.... The ones before porn on the internet.
-
Yeah I remember those days.... The ones before porn on the internet.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
The ones before porn on the internet.
FTFY :)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
Hmm. This sounds like an overly-elaborate demonstration of Wheeler's Law(*): Typing proficiency is inversely proportional to the number of people watching you do it. (*) My humble contribution to computer science fundamentals.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
-
Back in high school, when using a Commodore PET at a friends house, we would take turns working on code, but not exactly 'pair' programming or 'mob'. One of us would start writing code for 15 minutes or so, then walk away. The next person would have to come in, read what was written, and proceed. After 15 minutes or so, swap out again. There was never any dialogue, no discussion as to what was planned... just try to figure out based on what you were doing, did they understand and continue building or do you have to move forward with their design as best you can... The results were amusing.
When teaching programming at college level, I once in a last-year course tried organize the practical exercises, which was a farily big semester-length group project, in four stages. At the end of each of the three first stages, the results so far would be rotated among the groups, so that each group would take over that which was done by another group. The idea was to let the students experience taking over someone else's work, which is very common when you get job as a programmer, but not during your study years. Second, and equally important: You can't keep secret what you do. It is not just an internal secret between you and your professor (or boss, when you get a job); your colleagues will see your code, and will judge you by how you have done your work. Get used to it! Nice ideas don't always work out in practice. The students hated me for this setup! I forced them to reveal their innermost programming secrets, and to take over this horrible code from someone else, which was so useless that it would be much better to replace it all with the high quality stuff they had produced themselves in the previous stage. (They ALL though so...) They did NOT thank me for letting them try out a real-life-like work situation while still in school. :-)
-
A colleague has just attended a conference for open source .net and was speaking to some people who have gone beyond pair-programming to mob-programming. They have 2 60" screens, 2 devs, the project owner and a designer all working as a team with one person driving the keyboard. The company seems to feel that the ROI makes the process worthwhile. Not sure this would be for me; I don't like rigid pair-programming but am OK with opportunistic-pairing where it makes sense to solve a specific problem on a short term basis. Anyone tried mob-programming? How did it work out?
so if it goes south who gets the blame? My best algorithmisizing is away from the keyboard and all distractions (aka the talking idiots): I think and/or draw the entire process through from start to end including got-yas. A the keyboard to easy bang out something that 'seems to work [here and now]' so 'she'll be right then,' only to have it blow a gasket on other/real data. Also far easier to fix/enhance something you've already thought about as compared to something too quickly magiced together.
Sin tack the any key okay
