I was reading Martin Fowler's post on pairing misconceptions, where at the end he writes about how problematic code base encourages problematic developer behaviour: "It's only worth pairing on complex code, rote code yields no advantage". The problem here is that rote code is a mechanical solution, created without taking into account the bigger picture - precisely the problem that pairing helps to solve. This type of problem is similar to a code smell but is expressed through human interaction (or its absense in this case) - you could call it a behavioral smell.
I noticed that on the current project, in addition to somewhat reluctant pairing, the team has another problem - oftentimes when a business problem is discussed, the conversation revolves around low-level technical details. This prevent the customer team from contributing to the resolution of the problem.
In our case this behaviour is caused by a weak domain model that is insufficiently isolated from legacy db schema and esb messages. The model lacks useful abstractions representing business concepts and resulting business logic is very procedural - expressed using low-level operations on objects' fields that were extracted by breaking encapsulation. In the absence of higher-level abstractions the conversation is forced into technicalities of the problem.
I find it interesting how distinct code problems cause rather distinct behavioral smells. I am sure that there are more - perhaps this a topic to bring up during a retrospection meeting? By drawing attention to such behavioural smells we can identify issues before they grow into serious problems or highlight existing problems in our code bases.
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Monday, November 06, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)