Comments on: Don't get stuck! / Review: Sackman and Curtis http://blog.webfoot.com/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/ Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:52:27 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Best Webfoot Forward » VanDev talk summary http://blog.webfoot.com/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/comment-page-1/#comment-195 Best Webfoot Forward » VanDev talk summary Thu, 07 Feb 2008 05:29:11 +0000 http://www.webfoot.com/blog/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/#comment-195 [...] speed, however. I have reported previously on experiments by Demarco and Lister, Dickey, Sachman, Curtis, and Ko which measure the time for a number of programmers to do a task. What I found is that the [...] [...] speed, however. I have reported previously on experiments by Demarco and Lister, Dickey, Sachman, Curtis, and Ko which measure the time for a number of programmers to do a task. What I found is that the [...]

]]> By: Best Webfoot Forward » Sackman revisted http://blog.webfoot.com/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/comment-page-1/#comment-194 Best Webfoot Forward » Sackman revisted Sat, 17 Feb 2007 00:18:14 +0000 http://www.webfoot.com/blog/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/#comment-194 [...] To reiterate, there’s a paper by Sackman et al from 1966 that people have seized upon to show a huge variation in programmer productivity, a paper by Dickey in 1981 that refuted Sackman pretty convincingly, and an article by Curtis in the same issue as Dickey’s. I didn’t talk much about the Dickey paper, but Tony Bowden has a good blog posting on the Dickey paper, where Dickey reports on a more reasonable interpretation of numbers from the Sackman’s data. [...] [...] To reiterate, there’s a paper by Sackman et al from 1966 that people have seized upon to show a huge variation in programmer productivity, a paper by Dickey in 1981 that refuted Sackman pretty convincingly, and an article by Curtis in the same issue as Dickey’s. I didn’t talk much about the Dickey paper, but Tony Bowden has a good blog posting on the Dickey paper, where Dickey reports on a more reasonable interpretation of numbers from the Sackman’s data. [...]

]]> By: Best Webfoot Forward » Programmer productivity — part 3 http://blog.webfoot.com/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/comment-page-1/#comment-193 Best Webfoot Forward » Programmer productivity — part 3 Mon, 18 Dec 2006 06:16:10 +0000 http://www.webfoot.com/blog/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/#comment-193 [...] My recent reflections on the Curtis results and reflections on the Ko et al results of experiments of programmer productivity have focused on one narrow slice, what I call “hands-on-keyboard”. Hands-on-keyboard productivity is measured by how fast someone who is given a small, well-defined task can do that task. As I mentioned in those two blog posts, it is hard to measure even that simple thing. [...] [...] My recent reflections on the Curtis results and reflections on the Ko et al results of experiments of programmer productivity have focused on one narrow slice, what I call “hands-on-keyboard”. Hands-on-keyboard productivity is measured by how fast someone who is given a small, well-defined task can do that task. As I mentioned in those two blog posts, it is hard to measure even that simple thing. [...]

]]> By: Best Webfoot Forward » Programmer productivity — part 2 http://blog.webfoot.com/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/comment-page-1/#comment-192 Best Webfoot Forward » Programmer productivity — part 2 Sat, 16 Dec 2006 00:58:49 +0000 http://www.webfoot.com/blog/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/#comment-192 [...] In An Exploratory Study of How Developers Seek, Relate, and Collect Relevant Information during Software Maintenance Tasks, Andrew Ko et al report on the times that ten experienced programmers spent on five (relatively simple tasks). They give the average time spent as well as the standard deviation, and — like the Curtis results I mentioned before. (Note, however, that I believe Ko et al include programmers who didn’t finish in the allotted time. This will make the average lower than it would be if they waited for people to finish, and make the standard deviation appear smaller than it really is.) [...] [...] In An Exploratory Study of How Developers Seek, Relate, and Collect Relevant Information during Software Maintenance Tasks, Andrew Ko et al report on the times that ten experienced programmers spent on five (relatively simple tasks). They give the average time spent as well as the standard deviation, and — like the Curtis results I mentioned before. (Note, however, that I believe Ko et al include programmers who didn’t finish in the allotted time. This will make the average lower than it would be if they waited for people to finish, and make the standard deviation appear smaller than it really is.) [...]

]]> By: Vince http://blog.webfoot.com/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/comment-page-1/#comment-191 Vince Tue, 12 Dec 2006 08:27:18 +0000 http://www.webfoot.com/blog/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/#comment-191 Well, it's hard to control whether you get stuck or not, but you *can* learn keyboard shortcuts to save 1 min. a day, that's 365 min. a year! Of course, 365 disconnected minutes doesn't really buy you anything :p Well, it’s hard to control whether you get stuck or not, but you *can* learn keyboard shortcuts to save 1 min. a day, that’s 365 min. a year! Of course, 365 disconnected minutes doesn’t really buy you anything :p

]]> By: ducky http://blog.webfoot.com/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/comment-page-1/#comment-190 ducky Fri, 08 Dec 2006 17:56:52 +0000 http://www.webfoot.com/blog/2006/12/07/programmer-productivity/#comment-190 Someone mailed me privately about my assertion that "it's very difficult to get a large number of programmers to spend a large number of hours on non-useful problems." He said: > Insert obvious Windows Vista joke here... Someone mailed me privately about my assertion that “it’s very difficult to get a large number of programmers to spend a large number of hours on non-useful problems.” He said:

> Insert obvious Windows Vista joke here…

]]>