The above ascii graph will not render for joind.in' font but it's better than nothing.
I really enjoyed this talk. Frameworks with a blind eye towards academia are doomed to leech bad programming practices into the community. (re)Education is the only solution for programmers educated incorrectly.
Both talk content, premise, and delivery were excellent. I enjoyed Gemma's conversational speaking style, and she's able to quickly build rapport with the audience. This topic is important to me because, though we deal with analytics and data on a regular basis in the practice of software engineering, we don't often look at data and results for the best practices we tout and evangelize. Most of this touting is anecdotal, and it would benefit our industry as a whole to invest in studies and accumulation of data to inform our best practices.
Gemma lead us through several studies that were sometimes counter-intuitive yet scientifically based. They challenge conventional wisdom about software development and provide some good fodder for thought. Her style of delivery is energetic and fun.
This presentation had a lot of potential and I do think it was presented pretty well. I think the main thing that I wasn't crazy about is that Gemma spent so much time talking about the structure of a journal study and why people do research on software engineering that by the time she actually got to the individual studies, she had lost me. I felt like I was back in my 300 level english class again(not my favorite subject). I think I was just hoping for more of the "empirical evidence you need to defend “cutting edge” practices".
Comments
Comments are closed.
Remember the graph next time.
Interesting studies cited.
It makes me think about why I am coding the way I am coding.
I am interesting finding studies on good abstraction or managing complexity.
+-+
---------|E|----------
| +-+ |
[9]| [6]|
| |
+-+ [2] +-+ [11] +-+
|F|-------|C|--------|D|
+-+ +-+ +-+
| | |
[14]| [10]| [15]|
| | |
+-+ +-+ |
|A|-------|B|----------
+-+ [7] +-+
The above ascii graph will not render for joind.in' font but it's better than nothing.
I really enjoyed this talk. Frameworks with a blind eye towards academia are doomed to leech bad programming practices into the community. (re)Education is the only solution for programmers educated incorrectly.
Both talk content, premise, and delivery were excellent. I enjoyed Gemma's conversational speaking style, and she's able to quickly build rapport with the audience. This topic is important to me because, though we deal with analytics and data on a regular basis in the practice of software engineering, we don't often look at data and results for the best practices we tout and evangelize. Most of this touting is anecdotal, and it would benefit our industry as a whole to invest in studies and accumulation of data to inform our best practices.
Gemma lead us through several studies that were sometimes counter-intuitive yet scientifically based. They challenge conventional wisdom about software development and provide some good fodder for thought. Her style of delivery is energetic and fun.
Favorite talk of the conference! This was a great introduction to the world of software engineering research.
This presentation had a lot of potential and I do think it was presented pretty well. I think the main thing that I wasn't crazy about is that Gemma spent so much time talking about the structure of a journal study and why people do research on software engineering that by the time she actually got to the individual studies, she had lost me. I felt like I was back in my 300 level english class again(not my favorite subject). I think I was just hoping for more of the "empirical evidence you need to defend “cutting edge” practices".