
Agile negates benefits of functional programming by ex Jet employee - justinhj
https://medium.com/@bryanedds/agile-negates-the-most-important-benefits-of-switching-to-functional-programming-354c867391e9#.v5haejpus
======
VincentEvans
After reading this article all that remained was an unpleasant aftertaste from
self-aggrandizing and arrogant delivery.

But perhaps I don't pass the bar to be considered an intended audience this
was meant to be addressed to.

Signed, C# developer.

------
Arzh
A fluff piece where he doesn't actually show examples of why it doesn't work
but only boasts about how great the stuff he made was and how badly everyone
messed it up.

------
mindcrime
Sounds like another example of an organization that doesn't understand what
"agile" means and assumes "agile == cowboy coding with no rigor at all". But
that is not true. There is nothing prescriptive in the Agile Manifesto that
says you can't (or shouldn't) do: up-front design, code reviews, architectural
standards, code standards, etc. What the Agile Manifesto is saying, at heart,
is that you shouldn't be doing those things simply as ceremony, or treating
them as an end goal in their own right.

IOW, "Agile" was a reaction to bureaucracy heavy methodologies that were
highly prescriptive and loaded with ceremony of dubious value. Getting rid of
that stuff is the essence of Agile in many ways. BUT... that doesn't mean you
can't keep the stuff _that actually adds value in your organization_. And
that's maybe the biggest point of all: "Your Agile isn't my Agile". Agile at
Jet may result in an approach that looks completely different than Agile at
Fogbeam, or IBM, or Google, or $WHATEVER.

Let's look at the first part of the Agile Manifesto:

    
    
        We are uncovering better ways of developing
        software by doing it and helping others do it.
        Through this work we have come to value:
    
        Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
        Working software over comprehensive documentation
        Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
        Responding to change over following a plan
    
        That is, *while there is value in the items on
        the right*, we value the items on the left more.
    

Emphasis added.

Now let's look at the 12 Principles of Agile:

    
    
        We follow these principles:
    
        Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer
        through early and continuous delivery
        of valuable software.
    
        Welcome changing requirements, even late in
        development. Agile processes harness change for
        the customer's competitive advantage.
    
        Deliver working software frequently, from a
        couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a
        preference to the shorter timescale.
    
        Business people and developers must work
        together daily throughout the project.
    
        Build projects around motivated individuals.
        Give them the environment and support they need,
        and trust them to get the job done.
    
        The most efficient and effective method of
        conveying information to and within a development
        team is face-to-face conversation.
    
        Working software is the primary measure of progress.
    
        Agile processes promote sustainable development.
        The sponsors, developers, and users should be able
        to maintain a constant pace indefinitely.
    
        Continuous attention to technical excellence
        and good design enhances agility.
    
        Simplicity--the art of maximizing the amount
        of work not done--is essential.
    
        The best architectures, requirements, and designs
        emerge from self-organizing teams.
    
        At regular intervals, the team reflects on how
        to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts
        its behavior accordingly. 
    
    

Notice what's _not_ there: time boxed iterations, "sprints", "collective code
ownership", daily standups, "scrums", "planning poker", rejection of design
and/or architecture, rejection of code reviews, etc., etc.

Also pay extra attention to the last principle:

    
    
        At regular intervals, the team reflects on how
        to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts
        its behavior accordingly. 
    

This is why "My Agile isn't your Agile". Teams self-tune and adjust to fit
their environment. And you have a LOT of freedom to do that. Notice how little
of this is prescriptive.

I think the real problem is this: People adopt a half-baked software
development methodology, loosely based on a handful of ideas taken from Scrum
and/or XP, and maybe a cursory reading of the Agile Manifesto, call it "agile"
and then proceed to do haphazard slap-dash development and then when things
get fucked up, they blame "Agile".

This is so wrong... Agile does NOT mean "do whatever the fuck you want with no
planning, no architecture, no coding standards, no reviews, no design, etc."

