He quoted me thus:
Too busy to #TDD?
Too busy to pair?
Too busy to #refactor?
Too busy to micro-test?
I call bullshit. My buddy Erik Meade calls it Stupid Busy, and I think that nails it pretty well. All you’re really saying is that you’re too busy to go faster.
Most of the responses were RT’s and likes, both lending me fresh energy. A modest number of folks chatted with me, and that gives even more juice. (Readers please note: the sharers of these things you enjoy need to hear that you enjoy them, early and often. It is what gives us the will to share.)
I Believe What I Said…
Since that article, from 2014, I’ve reworked the ideas in it many times. I have developed theory to back it up, experiments by which someone can prove it to themselves, and a great deal of teaching material. I have written and spoken repeatedly on the topic of shipping more value faster. It’s part of almost everything I write about the modern software development synthesis. About the best recent statement, though I am still formulating new takes on it all the time, is in the video (w/transcript) Five Underplayed Premises Of TDD.
If you want to ship more value faster, you might want to consider TDD, as it will very likely help you do that, for nearly any definition of value you wish, provided only that the value involves writing logically branching code.
I genuinely believe that the modern synthesis is really the fastest way to ship value that we have at this time.
…But I Don’t Agree With Everyone Who Believes What I Said
And yet. I can easily see how one might infer from that quote — even from that whole blog, or from other parts of my output — that I am suggesting that using the full modern synthesis is a responsibility for a professional developer. Or to reverse the sense, that I am saying it is irresponsible to be a working programmer who works in another way.
Some who responded took me as saying that and opposed that idea, others took me as saying that and favored that idea. I’ve no idea what the RT’s and likes were inferring.
I am not saying that it is irresponsible of a working programmer to not do TDD et al, because I do not believe that.
Frankly, the idea gives me the willies. So I feel it’s incumbent on me to give you some detail about what I would actually say about this question of responsibility.
(Writers don’t get to decide what readers make of their ideas. You’ll take the money premise and all the rest of my output you decide to bother with, and you’ll make of it what you will. All the same, if I can see how you might think I was saying that, and if I disagree strongly with that, I feel my own — normal, individual, human — sense of responsibility to do what I can to make my ideas more transparent.)
Near-Universal, Individual, And Fraught With Internal Conflict
Nearly everyone develops a sense of what they are obliged, by their own description of who and what they are, to do in this world. We normally call this the sense of responsibility. For most of us, the twin pillars of that sense are 1) our deep beliefs about what is morally right or wrong, 2) our deep connections in the many networks of humans in which we find community.
Those senses of responsibility are rich, vague, staggeringly complex, and full of outliers, odd twists, preferences, and, when put in to language, startling contradictions.
Above all, they are individual. There are aggregate and statistical trends, of course, and if one could find an N-dimensional space big enough to hold the variables, one would see bell-curve like manifolds all through it. I have a sense of responsibility, and the odds are overwhelming that you do, too. Our respective responsibility-senses may appear to be similar, even highly similar. But they are not. It only appears that way because of the limits of language and the locality of the context we use to frame them. Our responsibility-senses are different because we are different.
If you read widely, you will have seen hundreds, maybe thousands, of situations in which one responsibility a person senses is pitted against another responsibility that same person senses. If you don’t read at all but you are old and thoughtful enough to seriously review your past, you will also have seen hundreds, maybe thousands, of situations like this in your own personal history, and that of others you know well.
Cutting To The Chase
Boy oh boy was I ever about to sprawl out and produce a nine-volume treatise on ethics and responsibility. From my simple dog-like goodness, I will spare us all. Instead, I will sum up my beliefs:
- That the modern synthesis is the best current way we have of shipping more value faster, whenever that value depends on logically branching code with lifetime longer than half a day.
- That I don’t honor my own sense of responsibility at all times, because I am weak or foolish, or because I carry conflicting senses simultaneously.
- That it is not for me to say what is responsible or irresponsible — global words — about any local context involving people who are strangers to me.
- That “doing your job well” is very often not dependent on shipping more value faster.
- That “doing your job well” can mean many things that are not good for you or the company you work for.
- That “doing your job well” is in any case not particularly more important to me than any number of other responsibilities I carry.
If you are a working programmer, you are a grown-up.
You are in the difficult position of balancing dozens of competing needs, using only your heart and body and mind, and I am well aware that this is a task far more demanding in real life than it seems, on paper, in a blog, or spoken by an idol. I won’t do that for you because I can’t do that for you. I only sometimes manage to do it for me.
In One (Long) Sentence
Please don’t take me, even in a crabby mood, as someone who assesses your sense of responsibility, commitment, or heaven forbid, morality, on the basis of whether or not you do TDD or any other part of the modern synthesis in your job.