The case for collaborative programming
Communications of the ACM
Investigating quality factors in object-oriented designs: an industrial case study
Proceedings of the 21st international conference on Software engineering
Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction
Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction
All I really need to know about pair programming I learned in kindergarten
Communications of the ACM
The prediction of faulty classes using object-oriented design metrics
Journal of Systems and Software
Agile Software Development: Principles, Patterns, and Practices
Agile Software Development: Principles, Patterns, and Practices
Pair Programming Illuminated
Test Driven Development: By Example
Test Driven Development: By Example
Strengthening the Case for Pair Programming
IEEE Software
A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Preliminary guidelines for empirical research in software engineering
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Assessing test-driven development at IBM
Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering
The collaborative software process(sm)
The collaborative software process(sm)
Implications of test-driven development: a pilot study
OOPSLA '03 Companion of the 18th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications
Test-Driven Development as a Defect-Reduction Practice
ISSRE '03 Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering
An initial investigation of test driven development in industry
Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Applied computing
Are Reviews an Alternative to Pair Programming?
Empirical Software Engineering
A multiple case study on the impact of pair programming on product quality
Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering
On the Effectiveness of the Test-First Approach to Programming
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change (2nd Edition)
Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change (2nd Edition)
Software architecture improvement through test-driven development
OOPSLA '05 Companion to the 20th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications
Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Software Engineering: Evolution and Emerging Technologies
Pair programming vs. side-by-side programming
EuroSPI'05 Proceedings of the 12th European conference on Software Process Improvement
Capable Leader and Skilled and Motivated Team Practices to Introduce eXtreme Programming
Balancing Agility and Formalism in Software Engineering
Information and Software Technology
Impact of test-driven development on productivity, code and tests: A controlled experiment
Information and Software Technology
Understanding the longevity of code smells: preliminary results of an explanatory survey
Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Refactoring Tools
Critical issues on test-driven development
PROFES'11 Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Product-focused software process improvement
On the effects of pair programming on thoroughness and fault-finding effectiveness of unit tests
PROFES'07 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Background: Test-driven development (TDD) and pair programming are software development practices popularized by eXtreme Programming methodology. The aim of the practices is to improve software quality. Objective: Provide an empirical evidence of the impact of both practices on package dependencies playing a role of package level design quality indicators. Method: An experiment with a hundred and eighty eight MSc students from Wroclaw University of Technology, who developed finance-accounting system in different ways (CS — classic solo, TS — TDD solo, CP — classic pairs, TP — TDD pairs). Results: It appeared that package level design quality indicators (namely package dependencies in an object-oriented design) were not significantly affected by development method. Limitations: Generalization of the results is limited due to the fact that MSc students participated in the study. Conclusions: Previous research revealed that using test-driven development instead of classic (test-last) testing approach had statistically significant positive impact on some class level software quality indicators (namely CBO and RFC metrics) in case of solo programmers as well as pairs. Combined results suggest that the positive impact of test-driven development on software quality may be limited to class level.