A formal experiment comparing extreme programming with traditional software construction

This paper describes an experiment carried out during the Spring/2002 academic semester with computer science students at the University of Sheffield. The aim of the experiment was to assess extreme programming and compare it with a traditional approach. With this purpose the students constructed software for real clients. We observed 20 teams working for 4 clients. Ten teams worked with extreme programming and ten with the traditional approach. In terms of quality and size teams working with extreme programming produced similar final products to traditional teams. The major implication for the current practice of traditional software engineering is that in spite of the absence of design and the presence of testing before coding the product obtained still has similar quality and size. The implication for extreme programming is the possibility of growth and maturation given the fact that it provided results that were as good as those from the traditional approach.