结对编程意味着每个开发人员花费双倍的成本。那钱值得吗？ [英] Pair programming means double cost per developer. Is it worth that money?

问题描述

敏捷中的对编程要求我们将付给单个程序员的薪水加倍。当然，使用这种方法，代码的质量要好得多，发现错误的时间要早​​得多，等等，但这仍然值得吗？也许我们应该将第二名开发人员的薪水支付给少数测试人员（后者通常比合格的程序员便宜得多）？有人对这种比较有经验吗？

Pair programming in Agile requires us to double the salary paid to single programmer. Of course with such approach the quality of the code is far cry better, bugs are found much earlier and so forth, but is that still worth that money? Maybe we should pay the 2nd developer's salary to the few testers (the latter are usually much cheaper than the qualified programmer)? Does anybody have any experience with such comparison?

推荐答案

您如何知道未配对的程序员效率更高？有时候，我认为单身/一对可以与兔子和乌龟的古老童话相提并论。

How do you know your unpaired programmers are any more efficient ? I sometimes think the single/pair is comparable to the old fairytale of the rabbit and the tortoise.

配对不会进入反生产工作的日子。我不知道有多少次开发人员花了数周的时间来研究某些东西，后来却被更简单的东西所取代。 在区域中的单个程序员经常做愚蠢的事情。当您想要的是更少的代码更多打孔时，产生太多的代码太容易了。

Pairing doesn't drift off into days of counter-productive work. I have no idea of how often I've seen developers spending weeks working on stuff that later turns out to be replaced by something far simpler. The single programmer "in the zone" often does stupid things. It's just too easy to produce too much code, when what you want is more punch with less code.

在后代，当灰尘安顿下来后，您会发现数百行（如果不是数千行的话）可能是因为没有对库X或技术Y知道的 而未编写的 代码。配对可以改善此问题，但不能解决。

And in posterity, when the dust settles, you find hundreds, if not thousands of lines of code that could have been not written because someone didn't know about library X or technique Y. Pairing improves this problem, but does not remove it. It encourages both individuals and the pair to do more research before diving into mindless code euphoria.

我希望我能够配对更多……。

I wish I was able to pair more....

这篇关于结对编程意味着每个开发人员花费双倍的成本。那钱值得吗？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！