Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think a problem is that we tend to overgeneralise our own experience. When we try out ideas, such as TDD, we (hopefully) get a good feel for how they work (or don't work) for us. Reading articles or getting advice might help us to understand and use those ideas better, but the impression is still based on your personal experience. That's fine when you're talking about how you like to work, but I think it comes unstuck when you start trying to apply it to other people. Even if you read other people's perspectives, it's often tempting to consider those that disagree to be idiots (although you might not be so blunt), and those that agree with you to be sensible.

I think it's more productive to try out a technique, try out some variations based on others' advice, and then share the experience: I found this technique useful in these situations, but not in these. Here are some tips that I found effective, and here's what didn't work for me. Then, people can try out techniques for themselves, and learn from your experience.

If we want to generalise what's effective and what's not for software development overall, then I think we need a much rigorous approach then getting a vibe from the community. I've only ever seen a handful of studies that try to be unbiased and somewhat scientific in assessing techniques like TDD.




Yes, but if you don't generalize you can't have a captivating title and can't reach the HN frontpage.


And let's not forget adding drama. It's not just that my generalization is right, it's that everything you have said is fucking wrong.

Because the world doesn't have enough drama.


You also can't be human or probably any animal for that matter. Pattern matching and generalization is how we survive and function in a world that is bigger than us.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: