[sgarland]

Yes, but they do have one critical failure mode: that the checklist failed to account for something (or that an expected reaction to a step being performed didn’t occur).

I was a submarine nuclear reactor operator, and one of my Commanding Officers once ordered that we stop using checklists during routine operations for precisely this reason. Instead, we had to fully read and parse the source documentation for every step. Before, while we of course had them open, they served as more of a backstop.

His argument – which I to some extent agree with – was that by reading the source documentation every time, we would better engage our critical thinking and assess plant conditions, rather than skimming a simplified version. To be clear, the checklists had been generated and approved by our Engineering Officer, but they were still simplifications.

[andrewaylett]

If the alternative to the check list is reading the full documentation, that's one thing. But in my experience -- as a Software Engineer, and random dude on the Internet -- the alternative is usually no check list or documentation.

[sgarland]

For sure – short of large and well-supported projects like Django et al., docs are notoriously incomplete if present at all.

Even then, you have to get people to read them, which is somehow a monumental task. Docs? Nah, lemme read this Medium blog instead.