From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public X-Google-Thread: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/01/20 Message-ID: <7854ik$j0i$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 434851981 References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <369F1D39.64A65BC1@sea.ericsson.se> <369f81a9.31040093@news.demon.co.uk> <77ommt$9bo$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <77vhjf$nn9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <77vld9$qvg$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <782rp0$kn6$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6Oap2.16170$MW1.4028@news2.giganews.com> <784lo6$59l$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <784sgq$bho$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x4.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Jan 20 17:42:47 1999 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java,comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-01-20T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <784sgq$bho$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dennison@telepath.com wrote: > In article <784lo6$59l$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, > robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > > Remember the goals here > > > > 1. To eliminate the notion of code ownership, and > > encourage egoless programming where people work as a > > team, and regard the product they are working on as a > > team product rather than a collectoin of individual > > projects. > > Perhaps part of the problem centers around this goal. I'm > not so sure you would actually *want* this in all > environments. I can see it making sense in a maintenance > mode. But for initial development I think everyone needs > a "home" in the project as much as they need a physical > "home" in the plant. > I just can't see it working where one person starts to > code up a design for a circular delimited logging queue > one day, and another person comes in the next and codes > up a bit more of it, then a third person come in the next > day and codes some more of it. Every person left to their > own devices would probably solve that problem a different > way. If all of them tried this at once, it'd be a mess. Smooth cooperative working together does not have to mean that people get in one another's way. Of course the project gets broken down into tasks, which are suitable for one person to work on, but the point is that once the code is checked in, it no longer belongs to the person who wrote it (for example, in the GNAT project we do NOT permit author's names in units, because our view is that everything was written by the team). That's the point. And if you have not worked in an environment where this works well, it's a pity, because it is a very pleasant and very productive way of working. -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own