Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On Pair Programming

martinfowler.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 121 posts

Re: On Pair Programming

#101

Post by dustingetz »

aspaviento wrote: post #97

I had a coworker with whom I did some pair programming and it was painful. He was very talkative, to the point of forcing me to interrupt him every time to come back to what we were doing. Also most of the time he made really hard to follow the code because he took every opportunity to show off his keyboard-shortcut-skills, jumping from file to file, jumping between lines of code, commenting and uncommenting code...…

1) You can make pairing part of the interview

2) You'll pick up his shortcut fluency in about two days of pairing ... I taught my co-founder Emacs and Clojure at the same time in about two days of pairing

Re: On Pair Programming

#102

Post by wccrawford »

taeric wrote: post #17
proc0 wrote: post #8

I had someone in an interview once "confess" that they did so much pair programming they had forgotten how to quickly do things on their own. It was said as if it was one of the pro's of pair prog., but I saw it as a huge downside that this person was so dependent on others to complete their day to day tasks.

I'm torn. I don't feel comfortable pair programming, but I think looking at an individual's speed is too narrow. Consider, you probably don't criticize this person's use of an IDE. Why is that different? Effectively, in places we are comfortable adding AI style assistance, odd that we shun just the I. To that end, we agree teams are typically needed. Shame we don't focus our measurements on the team. Feels a great wa…

If someone can't program without an IDE, there are plenty of free ones that they can download, and they're unlikely to ever be in a situation where they can't find an IDE but they can run and test their code.

Being unable to program without a partner is a serious handicap and will happen many times in a year, especially if people are sick or on vacation.

Re: On Pair Programming

#103

Post by workthrowaway »

nikofeyn wrote: post #80
jacques_chester wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what other industry or domain does this? none that i know of. Aviation, some surgeries. You know, low-stakes stuff.

those aren't analogous, like at all. or actually, they are analogous, just not in the sense you mean, as they don't serve as examples of "pair ". for both pilots and surgeons, no one is doing the same job at the same time. pilots and surgeons, when performing on the same flight or surgery, have different roles, and it's actually extremely important that they stick to and abide by those roles. you know, because it's h…

thank you!! i had the same exact thoughts last night but refrained from commenting. same exact thoughts about pilots and surgeons.

plus this: pair programming has only been studied / proven to work in a teaching environment, where one student is literally teaching the other and bringing them up to speed.

i don't know of any study that proves that it works in a professional setting with experienced people having more or less the same background, working on the same task

if there is any study, i would like to read it.

Re: On Pair Programming

#104

Post by codingdave »

We pair when we get stuck. It isn't our standard way to work, and it is difficult, in particular for remote teams. But still, spend 15-20 minutes screen-sharing with a coworker, and you find one of two things happen:

1) They see something you did not, you get past your block, and start being productive again.

2) They see nothing else, so you know that you actually have a thorny problem to solve, so you get to it.

In those small doses, I like pair programming. But I would not care to do it more.

Re: On Pair Programming

#105

Post by ken »

mr_custard wrote: post #12

I read through this quickly, but I couldn't find any mention of pair programming not being suitable for sensitive and introverted people - especially those that suffer from anxiety and other mental illnesses that can be made worse by the stress of pair programming. Whilst the article mentions that it "can be hard and stressful" there is still the assumption that most people are more or less the same in terms of menta…

You might be looking for the section "Pairing can be exhausting".

Re: On Pair Programming

#106

Post by edabobojr »

chownie wrote: post #86
mr_custard wrote: post #12

I read through this quickly, but I couldn't find any mention of pair programming not being suitable for sensitive and introverted people - especially those that suffer from anxiety and other mental illnesses that can be made worse by the stress of pair programming. Whilst the article mentions that it "can be hard and stressful" there is still the assumption that most people are more or less the same in terms of menta…

I think it's endemic of larger open plan office style organisations. They have (unintentionally?) self-selected out those with sensory processing issues plus some forms of autism just by the way the workplace is shaped. So perhaps that's why the concerns stated in the article don't take people with SPD/autism/other related issues into account. Pairing causes the social part of my brain to activate which is fine, but…

I have long thought that pair programming and open offices were yet another way of punishing anyone who is neuro-atypical.

Re: On Pair Programming

#107

Post by jordanlev »

Mike12398 wrote: post #79
jordanlev wrote: post #75

As a counterpoint to most of the comments here: I work at a company where almost every developer pairs all the time. I absolutely love it. I thought I would hate it. I'm an introvert. I previously worked as a solo freelancer and then as a remote teammate. So I was very nervous about this aspect of the job, but figured I'd give it a shot (other things about the job were appealing enough that I was willing to try it ou…

You're not an introvert.

I sure am! Introversion doesn't mean you don't like interacting with other people, rather it's that such interaction is draining, and you need to be alone to "recharge" (whereas extroverts "recharge" by talking to others). Even the exhaustion of interacting with people is more of a scale than a binary thing -- I personally find one-on-one interactions much easier than groups.

Re: On Pair Programming

#108

Post by bussierem »

bitwize wrote: post #19
oarabbus_ wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

Try using an old version of Visual Basic. Note how when you type something with a syntax error and then cursor off the line, the IDE will flag up the error with a modal dialog box you have to dismiss before you can continue. That's pair programming, except the modal dialog box is a smelly human looking over your shoulder.

This is the most accurate description I've ever found of my experience with pair programming. Thank you!

Re: On Pair Programming

#109

Post by lunias »

I've worked at places in the past that forced pairing. One monitor and two keyboards style. It was painful; impossible to get into flow state.

All of your mental maps need to be communicated repeatedly to the other person - and it's slow. It's like the difference between L1 cache lookup and sending an email and waiting for a response.

Re: On Pair Programming

#110

Post by taeric »

wccrawford wrote: post #102
taeric wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm torn. I don't feel comfortable pair programming, but I think looking at an individual's speed is too narrow. Consider, you probably don't criticize this person's use of an IDE. Why is that different? Effectively, in places we are comfortable adding AI style assistance, odd that we shun just the I. To that end, we agree teams are typically needed. Shame we don't focus our measurements on the team. Feels a great wa…

If someone can't program without an IDE, there are plenty of free ones that they can download, and they're unlikely to ever be in a situation where they can't find an IDE but they can run and test their code. Being unable to program without a partner is a serious handicap and will happen many times in a year, especially if people are sick or on vacation.

This still feels over simplistic. If there isn't someone else in the office to pair with, the code isn't getting pushed anyway, as it will lack a review.

I get that it is a flag. But a lot depends on degree. Sport metaphors are often a stretch, but if they are saying they need their team to play, that isn't super scary on its own.

If they need their full team to practice, that changes. And if they need a specific team member or they refuse to play, that is terrible.

And you simplify the IDE point heavily. Just picking up one is not going to get you productive right away. Might as well have that sick partner. :)

Post reply on HN