"You don't actually say that no real developers use TDD, but you seem to imply that by focusing on the fact that the teachers, authors, consultants and trainers that promote it "loudest" are earning money via the teaching, authoring, consulting and training in which they loudly promote it."
No that isn't what I am saying. I am saying many of these people have no programming experience worth a damn. If someone were to tell me how to program(which is what all these methodology sellers do), they would be much more credible if they actually had the programming chops to back it up.
Musashi writing a book on swordsmanship is one thing. If I (who couldn't wield a samurai sword to save his life) write a book that claims my "style" of swordsmanship is better than anything all the others existent today, I shouldn't be surprised if practicing swordsmen don't pay me much heed.
It is the juxtaposition of people with no demonstrated/demonstrable programming skills being loud and obnoxious about the superiority of their advice about programming which I pointed to.
I was also careful to distinguish between Beck and Martin (who at least walk the walk by putting out code developed using the methods they preach) from the other more "all hat no cattle" folks like Jeffries. so to answer your question,
"Bit of a catch-22 there, no? "
No, Not at all. :-). I don't have any problems with people telling me how to program. But I don't trust people who demonstrate convincingly that they know nothing about programming (like Ron Jeffries does with his Sudoku code) who also claim to be "masters" of programming.
That would be like trying to learn fighting skills from a martial arts "master" you saw getting bashed around by a couple of punks at the bar last night, and ended up being taken to hospital and is still covered with bandages and walks with a limp! A master who wins fights would be much more convincing if he claimed he discovered a new martial art which makes existing ones obsolete.
I explicitly said
"None of them ever built a software product or a startup. Neither do they show us any decent body of code written with their superior approach (vs talk interminably about how our code will be better if we adopt their advice and pay them the big consulting $$)."
I stand by this. These guys write books that are the programming equivalent of "Who Moved My Cheese"?. "Coders at Work" otoh, focusses on people who actually are great programmers. Each interview contains more wisdom on programming than reams of "agile" (and these days "lean") textbooks.
FWIW, I did TDD almost exclusively for three years (when I worked at ThoughtWorks), but I don't do TDD anymore, though I still have unit tests.
I don't know about the specific people named in swordmanship but generally in sport the best teachers, coaches and managers will not necessarily be the best at the actual sport. Maybe that doesn't apply in the martial arts though.
And that's at the top level. For ordinary folks I'd suggest that the advice given by a legend may be inspirational, but that pragmatic advice from a standard teacher which is aimed at their level (e.g. "walk away from bar fights if at all possible") may be more appropriate. So I have no problem with methodology suggestions provided by the less than leet.
Also, your reply suggests you unit test, you just don't write the tests first. Which means, compared with the average programmer, you're like Greenpeace complaining about PETA and while you see a big difference the 'average' person just lumps you in together under the general heading of "extremist weirdos".
Fair Enough. You have a right to form your own opinions.
Asking for proof of competence is not "ad hominem", especially in a context where that competence is what is under discussion. But yeah,, whatever.
I think most agile guru can't code for nuts. If you have difference of opinion, show me some great code these agile gurus wrote that in your opinion gives them the "level" to teach us how to code. Or a wildly successful project they managed(No the original XP project at Chrysler that failed doesn't count! ;-)) to the point they can give us the rest of us lessons.
"So I have no problem with methodology suggestions provided by the less than leet."
I don't either. But I do have problems with people who can't put one foot in front of the other masquerading as martial arts teachers. A teacher should know something beyond the students they purport to teach.
Shifting form martial arts to music, If someone doesn't know how to string a guitar and sets himself up as a "master guitarist" , should we all automatically respect him as a maestro just because he calls himself one?
Programming like music depends on quality of the output, not what title is on a visiting card. if someone can't sing "Jingle Bells" in tune, he is hardly a "musician" no matter what he calls himself or how much he blogs/tweets/writes self promoting pamphlets. Likewise for the programmatic equivalent of what (agile "guru" Ron Jeffries's attempts at TDDIng a Sudoku solver are. Please do a web search for "Ron Jeffries Sudoku Norvig" for the gory details).
A master musician is someone who can play very well. A music teacher should play much better than the untrained/untalented, if not at superhuman levels. There is a minimu,m bar of performance where it is criminal to let such a person "teach".
" your reply suggests you unit test, you just don't write the tests first."
I use what works.
But your vague Green peace/PETA analogy doesn't hold. You have your history mixed up.
You imply that anyone who uses unit tests is different from a an Agile Kool Aid drinking, propaganda spouting full time TDDer only as matter of degree. So Unit tests = agile to some degree !
Yeah Right :-).
Unit (and other) tests were used much before the agile weirdos came on the scene and blew it up into some ultimate design method (which I don't believe in - I've stated what I believe in - I think the Agile movement is largely inhabited and sustained by consultants and "scrum masters" and people who write books but no/very bad code.).
Using unit tests is not supporting Agile/XP/whatever. Drawing an occasional UML ish diagram on the whiteboard doesn't mean you support the RUP methodology salesmen.
FYI. I am done with this thread. I have no intention of going back and forth with you on a long and tedious thread. The PlinkPonk Thread Depth Alarm just went off. If you are really interested in discussing this offline, my email is in my profile. Else, well met and have a great day.
No that isn't what I am saying. I am saying many of these people have no programming experience worth a damn. If someone were to tell me how to program(which is what all these methodology sellers do), they would be much more credible if they actually had the programming chops to back it up.
Musashi writing a book on swordsmanship is one thing. If I (who couldn't wield a samurai sword to save his life) write a book that claims my "style" of swordsmanship is better than anything all the others existent today, I shouldn't be surprised if practicing swordsmen don't pay me much heed.
It is the juxtaposition of people with no demonstrated/demonstrable programming skills being loud and obnoxious about the superiority of their advice about programming which I pointed to.
I was also careful to distinguish between Beck and Martin (who at least walk the walk by putting out code developed using the methods they preach) from the other more "all hat no cattle" folks like Jeffries. so to answer your question,
"Bit of a catch-22 there, no? "
No, Not at all. :-). I don't have any problems with people telling me how to program. But I don't trust people who demonstrate convincingly that they know nothing about programming (like Ron Jeffries does with his Sudoku code) who also claim to be "masters" of programming.
That would be like trying to learn fighting skills from a martial arts "master" you saw getting bashed around by a couple of punks at the bar last night, and ended up being taken to hospital and is still covered with bandages and walks with a limp! A master who wins fights would be much more convincing if he claimed he discovered a new martial art which makes existing ones obsolete.
I explicitly said
"None of them ever built a software product or a startup. Neither do they show us any decent body of code written with their superior approach (vs talk interminably about how our code will be better if we adopt their advice and pay them the big consulting $$)."
I stand by this. These guys write books that are the programming equivalent of "Who Moved My Cheese"?. "Coders at Work" otoh, focusses on people who actually are great programmers. Each interview contains more wisdom on programming than reams of "agile" (and these days "lean") textbooks.
FWIW, I did TDD almost exclusively for three years (when I worked at ThoughtWorks), but I don't do TDD anymore, though I still have unit tests.