If you had read through any of the articles and/or books I’ve written on these principles over the last 15 years, you’d have found that I don’t recommend the religious or dogmatic approach you blamed me for.I'm following this confrontation because I think it represents one of the primary benefits of our current age. The two parties aren't just blowing hot air: one is one of the greatest software architects living, and the other two are extremely successful professionals with large numbers of followers.
If people are misquoting or misinterpreting you, by all means, take them out back behind the shed. Perhaps they have been irresponsible. Perhaps these are wide-spread inaccuracies, and this is a chance to set the record straight. That's what Robert's trying to do.
On the other hand, perhaps real problems emerge with the methodology in some circumstances.
It's all out in public, so everyone can understand the nuances of each argument and make their own conclusions.
Think if George Washington were blogging to correct Supreme Court justices trying to interpret the "founding fathers' original intent". Or John Maynard Keynes were here to set the economists straight about what to do with our current financial mess. (The economic blogging battles going on make this software discussion seem very polite by comparison.)
Hopefully we'll get more details from all sides about both interpretation and implementation problems around test-driven development, SOLID, Agile, and other principles.
No comments:
Post a Comment