As a hardcore user of TDD and refactoring, there are a number of what I think of as “second tier” refactorings that I use quite frequently. In one’s first intro to refactoring, one sees a lot of "rename", "re-order", "inline", and "extract". These are pretty potent tools, don’t get me wrong, but I think of […]
Second-Order Refactoring: Swap Supplier and Supply Read More »
Now we’ve seen these basic ideas, human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative. I want to use them in a particular way for a bit. Let’s take some practices we know we like, and work backwards, seeing if/how these "known-goods" relate to those ideas. Let’s talk about "Working By Stories" for this first one. I’ll describe
Working By Stories – A Change Harvester’s Take Read More »
TIme to take up “iterative”, the last, but by no means least, of the bywords of the change-harvesting worldview: human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative. Previous Posts in This Series Here: Human Change Local Change Oriented Change Taken Change The heart of the iterative approach is assuming change. We embrace it, we plan for it,
Iterative Change – What and Why Read More »
Human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative, those are the hallmarks of the change-harvester’s approach. This morning I want to tackle “taken”, which is about grounding the substance and approach of our changes to the situation that is already there. Want to catch up? Previous articles in the series here: Human Change Local Change Oriented Change
Taken Change – What and Why Read More »
The change-harvesting approach has these elements at its base: human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative. Today, I want to talk about what that adjective “oriented” means. Prior muses on human and local are here: Human Change: What and Why Local Change: What and Why We’ve said that leaning in to the humans in our systems
Oriented Change – What and Why Read More »
The change-harvester uses these five words to describe the properties of successful change: human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative. Let’s talk about “local”. See the previous post “Human Change” here These muses turn in to blogs + podcasts, and you can subscribe to them at geepawhill.org .) When we say we want our changes to
Local Change – What and Why Read More »
Today, let’s talk about the change-harvesters use of the concept-cluster we describe with the adjective "human". We advocate that both the what and the how are best centered around the humans in our systems. The change-harvester looks at changes — in code, in individuals, in teams, in process & flows, in organizations — and sees
Human Change – What and Why Read More »
I want to talk about value today, and especially want to consider an idea I call multivalence, which seems quite central to putting the change-harvesting ideas to work. I recently chanced across a timeline convo that by asked what we should call things it would be good to achieve that weren’t things that were directly
Multivalence for Change Harvesters Read More »
The reason it’s so important for you to see 100 lines of code on your screen is that you have arranged the code so that 100 lines seems like a sane quantity. What you’re doing is working against your own capability. The reason it’s so important that no one interrupts you for six-hour blocks is
Lining It Up That Way (Rant) Read More »
A recurring respondents’ theme is “TDD is irrelevant in front-end code”. It’s easy to offer/receive this comment combatively, but I think a little more rich discussion of the factors involved might bring us to new and different positions about UI and TDD. Most folks who offer that are living in some sort of JS world:
TDD on the Front End Read More »
