<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Waiting for the Phone to Ring</title>
	<atom:link href="http://menloinnovations.com/blog/2009/11/waiting-for-the-phone-to-ring/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://menloinnovations.com/blog/2009/11/waiting-for-the-phone-to-ring/</link>
	<description>a peek inside the minds of Menlo Innovations LLC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 18:50:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lisamarie</title>
		<link>http://menloinnovations.com/blog/2009/11/waiting-for-the-phone-to-ring/comment-page-1/#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>Lisamarie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://menloinnovations.com/blog/?p=269#comment-49</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re right about it not being the panacea for all software ills. It&#039;s only one part of a larger equation. In my particular case, my first brush with unit testing was on a small (very small) project. There was no doubt larger issues at play (design and architecture, for example) of which I was largely oblivious given I was trying to learn a new programming language *and* how to unit test. In that case, I suspect that my pair partner was bearing much of the weight of those larger concerns. (Thank you, Aparna!)

Speaking of my pair partner, I also believe that pairing plays a big role in the success of projects. Constant code review, two minds working on a common problem, support for standards, etc. all contribute to project success. We&#039;ve written about that a bit already, but will undoubtedly tackle it in more detail in the future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re right about it not being the panacea for all software ills. It&#8217;s only one part of a larger equation. In my particular case, my first brush with unit testing was on a small (very small) project. There was no doubt larger issues at play (design and architecture, for example) of which I was largely oblivious given I was trying to learn a new programming language *and* how to unit test. In that case, I suspect that my pair partner was bearing much of the weight of those larger concerns. (Thank you, Aparna!)</p>
<p>Speaking of my pair partner, I also believe that pairing plays a big role in the success of projects. Constant code review, two minds working on a common problem, support for standards, etc. all contribute to project success. We&#8217;ve written about that a bit already, but will undoubtedly tackle it in more detail in the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tathagat Varma</title>
		<link>http://menloinnovations.com/blog/2009/11/waiting-for-the-phone-to-ring/comment-page-1/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>Tathagat Varma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://menloinnovations.com/blog/?p=269#comment-48</guid>
		<description>Nice article, and the picture you depict about &quot;throwing stuff over the wall - to and fro&quot; is so global! However, what I don&#039;t understand or agree with is that small stuff like unit testing alone could magically fix problems at all levels of software - code, design, architecture, requirements, performance, scalability, interop, memory...and so on. I think there is a legitimate need for better unit testing...there is no doubt about it. But, I would be sceptical to treat it like panacea for all software development malaise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice article, and the picture you depict about &#8220;throwing stuff over the wall &#8211; to and fro&#8221; is so global! However, what I don&#8217;t understand or agree with is that small stuff like unit testing alone could magically fix problems at all levels of software &#8211; code, design, architecture, requirements, performance, scalability, interop, memory&#8230;and so on. I think there is a legitimate need for better unit testing&#8230;there is no doubt about it. But, I would be sceptical to treat it like panacea for all software development malaise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
