A Preliminary Study on the Impact of a Pair Design Phase on Pair Programming and Solo Programming

  • Name:

    Konferenzartikel 

  • Author:

    Matthias Müller 

  • Zusammenfassung

    The drawback of pair programming is the nearly doubled personnel cost. The extra cost of pair programming originates from the strict rule of extreme programming where every line of code should be developed by a pair of developers. Is this rule not a waste of resources? Is it not possible to gain a large portion of the benefits of pair programming by only a small fraction of the meeting time of a pair programming session? We conducted a preliminary study to answer this question by splitting the pair programming process into a pair design and a pair implementation phase. The pair implementation phase is compared to a solo implementation phase which in turn was preceeded by a pair design phase, as well. The study is preliminary as its major goal was to identify an appropriate sample size for subsequent experiments. The data from this study suggest that there is no difference in terms of development cost between a pair and a solo implementation phase if the cost for developing programs of similar level of correctness is concerned.
  • Year:

    2005 

  • Links:
Beteiligte Mitarbeiter (zufällige Reihenfolge)
Titel Vorname Nachname
Dr. Ing. Matthias Müller
Projekte
Titel
EIR
Leicht

Bibtex

@inproceedings{,
author={Matthias M{\"u}ller},
title={A Preliminary Study on the Impact of a Pair Design Phase on Pair Programming and Solo Programming},
year=2005,
month=Apr,
booktitle={Empirical Assessment In Software Engineering (EASE)},
url={https://ps.ipd.kit.edu/downloads/ka_2005_preliminary_study_impact_pair_design_phase.pdf},
abstract={The drawback of pair programming is the nearly doubled personnel cost. The extra cost of pair programming originates from the strict rule of extreme programming where every line of code should be developed by a pair of developers. Is this rule not a waste of resources? Is it not possible to gain a large portion of the benefits of pair programming by only a small fraction of the meeting time of a pair programming session? We conducted a preliminary study to answer this question by splitting the pair programming process into a pair design and a pair implementation phase. The pair implementation phase is compared to a solo implementation phase which in turn was preceeded by a pair design phase, as well. The study is preliminary as its major goal was to identify an appropriate sample size for subsequent experiments. The data from this study suggest that there is no difference in terms of development cost between a pair and a solo implementation phase if the cost for developing programs of similar level of correctness is concerned.},
address={Keele, UK},
}