Extremism is overrated. When it comes to sport, what is so great about looping the loop on a skateboard or surfing skyscraper waves in shark-infested waters?
I feel the same way about extreme people: I prefer equivocators who say 'maybe' and 'I could be wrong' to zealots who punctuate their opinions by detonating explosives strapped to their bodies.
But when it comes to information technology, extremism in a variety of forms has its attractions. The most respectable practitioners of this brand of computing are the extreme programmers.
The high priest of 'XP' code-crunching is Kent 'embrace change' Beck. In his book Extreme Programming Explained, he argues that hiccups in a programming project can usually be traced back to X failing to speak to Y, to the outrage of the remaining letters of the alphabet such as P in the office (a point filed under communication).
To prevent disharmony, they should all avoid over-elaboration (simplicity) and be blunt whatever the consequences (feedback and courage).
Beck's doctrine is essentially the theory that the most elegant solution is usually the right one, but with an emphasis on pair work. Two code-crunchers trying to make sense of mumbo jumbo are better than one, according to Beck, who maybe simplifies too much and has been accused of 'revival tent evangelism'.