Month: August 2007

His top three preferences in brief:

• internalized discipline over externally-enforced discipline
• coaching over enforcement
• collaboration over direction

It’s easy to agree with these preferences, but whether or not they can be put into practice depends very heavily on the members of the team. Unless you’re in a startup environment, you inherit people and culture as well as code.  While he makes a brief nod to hiring in the first section of his post, having the right people in the right places makes for much better results.

Miller does the best job of explaining his third preference.  Providing the rationale and context for a course of action gives a developer input and an opportunity to buy into an idea.  The success of this approach still depends on the having the right people.  I follow it with my own employees as much as possible.

Jeremy Miller asks that question in this post.

I haven’t had a chance to use it on any projects, but I really like the idea of customer-facing tests. Miller describes them very well as “executable requirements”. The comments highlight a number of alternatives to Fit, including FitNesse, Green Pepper, and ZiBreve.

From the comment volume on Miller’s post, it seems that only the specific implementation of Fit is on its way out. The idea looks very much alive.

One of the FxCop rule violations I found in one of my projects had to do with IDisposable not being implemented.  My search for examples of how to resolve this yielded a lot of helpful links, including these:

• An MSDN article on correct implementation of IDisposable
• A older CodeProject article on IDisposable that takes an odd shot at unit testing
• A newer CodeProject article on IDisposable and the dispose pattern
• A Channel9 discussion on IDisposable