The counting LOC thread reminded me of something I had heard somewhere but can't remember where now, or if I had just made it up entirely...
There are, in general, no metrics that can adequately quantify anything about a person. The only reason why Meyers-Brigs can quantify you into one of 16 groups is that the group descriptions are about as specific as a horiscope. This is one of the central fallicies of HR-psychology, in my opinion. Figuring out the bottom 10% of your company and firing them is about as easy as figuring out which 50% of your advertising budget you are wasting and not spending it.
That's some nice hot flamebait there indeed.
Accurate estimation is easy. Precise estimation is where things get tricky.
Err, surely not. Precise estimation is easy but accurate estimation is nigh on impossible, as is foo() will take 2 hours and 15 minutes to write (very precise), but potentially wildly inaccurate (as in -15minutes / +two weeks).
If I say, "foo() will take between five minutes and five years," that is accurate, but not precise. Probably estimates that are both accurate and precise is where the difficulty lies.
surely not not.
Accuracy of estimation drops off precipitously with distance from this moment. That's one of the reasons short iterations are so useful. Never put much faith in an estimate of more than 4 weeks. (And stick to weekly goals or shorter if you know what's good for you.)
Fog Creek Home