Cowboy coding

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Cowboy coding is software development where programmers have autonomy over the development process. This includes control of the project's schedule, languages, algorithms, tools, frameworks and coding style.

A cowboy coder can be a lone developer or part of a group of developers working with minimal process or discipline.[citation needed] Usually it occurs when there is little participation by business users, or fanned by management that controls only non-development aspects of the project, such as the broad targets, timelines, scope, and visuals (the "what", but not the "how").[citation needed]

Cowboy coding typically has negative connotations, depending on one's opinions on the role of management and formal process in software development. "Cowboy coding" is often used as a derogatory term by supporters of software development methodologies.

Disadvantages[edit]

In cowboy coding, the lack of formal software project management methodologies may be indicative (though not necessarily) of a project's small size or experimental nature.[1] Software projects with these attributes may exhibit:

Lack of release structure[edit]

Lack of estimation or implementation planning might cause a project to be delayed. Sudden deadlines or pushes to release software may encourage the use of quick and dirty or code and fix techniques that will require further attention later.

Inexperienced developers[edit]

Cowboy coding can be common at the hobbyist or student level where developers might initially be unfamiliar with the technologies, such as testing, version control and/or build tools, usually more than just the basic coding a software project requires.

This can result in time required for learning to be underestimated, causing delays in the development process. Inexperience might also lead to disregard of accepted standards, making the project source difficult to read or causing conflicts between the semantics of the language constructs and the result of their output.

Uncertain design requirements[edit]

Custom software applications, even when using a proven development cycle, can experience problems with the client concerning requirements. Cowboy coding can accentuate this problem by not scaling the requirements to a reasonable timeline, and might result in unused or unusable components being created before the project is finished. Similarly, projects with less tangible clients (often experimental projects, see independent game development) could begin with code and never a formal analysis of the design requirements. Lack of design analysis could lead to incorrect or insufficient technology choices, possibly requiring the developer to port or rewrite their software in order for the project to be completed.

Incompleteness[edit]

Many software development models, such as Extreme Programming, use an incremental approach which stresses that the software must be releasable at the end of each iteration. Non-managed projects may have few unit tests or working iterations, leaving an incomplete project unusable.

Advantages[edit]

  • Developers maintain a free-form working environment that may encourage experimentation, learning, and free distribution of results.
  • It allows developers to cross architectural and/or tiered boundaries to resolve design limitations and defects.
  • Without a development/designer framework, the programmer, as opposed to the project manager, is responsible for removing roadblocks. This might improve the speed of development.
  • Independent developers can begin projects with cowboy coding techniques before later selling them to commercial use or creating community-supported projects.
  • Small projects might be burdened by heavy software management methodologies; cowboy coding removes this burden.
  • Since coding can be done during the developer's free time, a hobby project could come to fruition which otherwise wouldn't have.[2]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Hughes, Bob and Cotterell, Mike (2006). Software Project Management, pp.283-289. McGraw Hill Education, Berkshire. ISBN 0-07-710989-9
  2. ^ K, Alex. Google's "20 percent time" in action http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/05/googles-20-percent-time-in-action.html, Official Google Blog, 2006-5-18

External links[edit]