On 14 Aug 2013 10:00, "David Barbour" <dmbarbour_at_gmail.com> wrote
> You seem to be implying that "learning and exploratory experience" is not
valued for efficiency reasons.
I'm not, it's not all about time efficiency though.
> As it happens, efficient refinement of software requirements is a big
concern in real development.
'real'?
> Right. I suppose you would say a violinist playing in a room by herself
is 'playing live'.
Yes, of course. Perhaps even in a live room.
> Agile programming isn't live programming. It has a short cycle. Totally
different.
Some are working towards a hybrid.
> It's ridiculous to call it programming without a program to prove it.
The program is there, visible, tangible, part of the "product", it just has
an explicit time dimension.
> Many of the technical requirements overlap, and some of those that do not
overlap are also not in conflict. I agree it's worth paying attention to
what the other community is doing. (That's why I'm here.)
Multiple, interacting communities are a good thing!
Alex (on the hoof)
Received on Wed Aug 14 2013 - 08:39:08 BST