lixo.org

After reading A Theory Of Fun, I started seeing projects (and many other human activities) modelled as a game. In the book, Raph Koster describes a series of game development rules, and I found that they can be mapped to the software development project domain with some interesting results:

• A project, just like a game, has roles. In projects, they’re specific to each role. These rules define the possible actions for each of them. (This one isn’t described in the book, but I added it just to contextualise.)
• Role-specific rules should be unambiguous, intelligible and apply to all people in that role.
• No project can be developed without the meaningful interaction of the people in all roles.
• The outcome of a project has to be uncertain, otherwise it loses its appeal.
• Rules and representation of a project are not independent but interact with each other.
• People require clear and immediate feedback to understand the relationship between action and outcome.
• People require a clear goal so they can perform meaningful actions within the project world.
• Conflict and competition against time, budget and scope are essential for everyone’s motivation.
• The challenges of a project should match the skills of the people involved: neither too easy (boring) nor too difficult (frustrating).
• Projects can be developed without the need for even skill sets among the team. Instead the people learn through interaction, and this should be allowed and encouraged to happen.
• People perform actions within the project world and observe how these actions change the state of the project.
• People form a hypothesis about the meaning of a deliverable or action on the basis of their studies.
• People recognise and learn fundamental patterns within the project and can apply these to different situations (and, of course, other projects).

The more I look at these, the more this matches the way I see people working in agile projects. I’m sure there’s a lesson to be learned here…

Developers in most projects I have seen try to establish some sort of convention around leaving TODOs in the code. The most common seems to be “if you see something funny, try to fix it immediately, but if it’d take too long and you’ve got something else to worry about, leave a comment next to it starting with TODO, your initials and maybe a date”.

You know what? Using comments for that is not as cool in Ruby, Python or Java, which has had static imports for a while now. How about creating a TODO method that takes in the initials, date and comment text, or whatever else you might find useful?

import static my.project.DevelopmentUtils.TODO;

…

public void doStuffThatSmellsFunny() {
   TODO(”CV, 21/jan”, “Clean this mess up after fixing #3849″);
   …
}

There are some advantages to this: you can actually put some code inside that method to do, say, logging. Another good thing is that now the TODOs can be tracked using the same refactoring tools and features of modern IDEs as just any other code in the project.

It may seem a bit cumbersome, but I’ve been trying that for a few days now and it feels quite pleasant to use. I got my TODO method to just spit out the message to the console so when I run tests, I can quickly get an idea of what areas of the code touch stinky or incomplete ones.