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

The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

simplermachines.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 308 posts

Re: The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

#81

Post by ratww »

throwdbaaway wrote: post #62
ratww wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true in my experience. I also participated in such an "experiment" and I'm normally the one with more endurance and speed, able to do overtime, or work on personal projects after hours. In my experience, with daily pairing, both workers felt completely drained of energy after 4 hours (including pauses). Pairing a couple hours a day, or a couple times a week is alright, and very productive. Doing it 5 days…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27082522 - this guy is cut out for Extreme Programming. If something is good, why not have it all the time, right? We mortals, are likely more suitable for moderate programming, with infrequent informal pairing when necessary.

I don't think it's an apt comparison.

Having the same supper feels more of a way to avoid stress, to avoid making multiple decisions daily, to have some grounding in your life, to have less risk. Similar to Steve Jobs wearing the same uniform everyday to work. [1]

As said in other post in this thread, by Cthulhu_, part of the appeal of pairing is "getting out of your comfort zone". I don't think this guy wants to be out of his comfort zone for 8 hours a day.

If he were a coder, maybe "stability" would be working solo. Maybe he would have liked 8hrs/day pairing. Maybe he'd prefer start his coding around 6:00 and going home after lunch. No way of knowing.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2012/10/05/steve...

Re: The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

#82

Post by ratww »

kstenerud wrote: post #68

Pair programming generates visceral responses due to it being introduced as if it were fact, which for me always triggers my spidey senses. People who didn't like it were told "you're doing it wrong" or "you didn't give it a proper chance". Dismissing criticisms out of hand only furthers distrust, regardless of the actual value of the idea. I played along and paired for awhile, but now steadfastly refuse to pair, eve…

> The irritation of being that close to someone and having to engage with them for even half an hour is draining, and I took more frequent and longer breaks because of this (much to the annoyance of my pair-partner, who couldn't work while I was away).

For me the issue wasn't just the difference in frequency or duration of breaks, but also the fact that different people prefer to take breaks at different times.

In the end, unless you're very lucky, it ends up being a compromise for both parts and the productivity gains are negated by the constant context switching.

Re: The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

#83

Post by mekkkkkk »

wilsonrocks wrote: post #60
ratww wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was a very strange workplace. Its atmosphere was half frat-like and half cult-like. There was literal chest beating and shouting motivational stuff during sales meetings, an incredibly amount of beer (which isn't necessary an issue, but in this case it was ), sometimes drugs (which led to some people being fired whenever it became public), lots of sexual harassment complaints (which also led to some surprise fir…

I'm glad you got out! I find that CEO level bosses (I used to be a teacher so am including heads/principals here) love to pontificate about stuff not related to the job. I've often wondered why. It's sometimes harmless, and clearly,as in your case, sometimes harmful. I do wonder what causes it though.

You could reverse the statement and say that someone with overly high confidence, an inflated ego and an affinity for preaching is more likely to climb the ladder to C-level. That tracks.

Re: The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

#84

Post by Olreich »

jmcgough wrote: post #51

Since the comments here are mostly people appalled by the idea of pairing - try it before you knock it. Even the author says there's a lot of benefits to it, but it wore down on them over time. I did pairing for a few year at a company early in my career. Some days it felt draining, but I learned a lot , quickly, from working with senior engineers and seeing how they approached problems or building systems. You even…

Pair programming only seems good when there is a large disparity in experience or seniority. The senior engineer is there to teach the junior engineer and is sacrificing a great deal of time and energy to do so. That trade off may be worth it. Pairing people with the same skill set? Mostly that’s just a waste.

Re: The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

#85

Post by mekkkkkk »

UweSchmidt wrote: post #29

"We were Pivots, and one of the things that made us Pivots was that we paired." Red flag for all kinds of weirdness if you're made to take on a company-based identity.

Yeah, this sort of behavior should make anyone cringe. I understand that you want to encourage team spirit and build cohesion, but jfc pump the brakes. Reminds of the Noogler hats[0] that screams "I'm New Resource no. 348, bear with me as I assimilate".

[0] https://obie.ai/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/noogler.jpeg

Re: The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

#86

Post by piva00 »

fancy_hammer wrote: post #33
piva00 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked for a couple of years on a company where we had a "pair-up all the time" when working and... We were very aware it wasn't possible to keep up like that 8h/day every single day. Most days we were very happy with 4 hours, really productive (and exhausting) days were around the 6 hours mark. We made sure to take breaks every 45 min-1h30 (depending how well the session was going), those breaks could be from 10 m…

6 solid hours of coding solo is pushing my daily limits. I can do more but productivity goes down. Day in day out pair coding sounds for 6 hours sounds more intense again.

Isn't that what I stated here?

> We were very aware it wasn't possible to keep up like that 8h/day every single day. Most days we were very happy with 4 hours, really productive (and exhausting) days were around the 6 hours mark.

Re: The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

#87

Post by gregolsen »

First off - I feel terribly sorry for the author's experience and I can totally empathise to it. Also want to share my personal experience and some mitigation techniques. I was pairing 8+ hours per day from 2012-2017 with 10+ engineers in total, most of that time fully remote. My company highly praised Pivotal and its processes, specifically pair-programming. Similar to the author, I have experienced different levels of engagement from my peers, conflicts, etc. I can 100% agree that pair-programming is extremely physically/mentally exhausting. Even just to talk for 8 hours/day puts your brain under extreme pressure. Here are some of techniques I've learnt and employed to mitigate the negative consequences:

* Talk through the pros and cons of pair programming with your new pair upfront. Ideally have your thoughts on the topic already written in a doc. E.g. clarify the difference between the dynamic: person behind the keyboard (driver) is generally thinking slower (spends time on typing), while the observer have more time to think. Explain the importance of switching the driver regularly. Explain the benefits of being the driver: e.g. if a person wants to build up the context in a new area it might make sense to be the driver and learn at slower pace. Ideally switch the driver every day.

* Agree on the scheduled regular breaks. E.g. I used to have a pomodoro timer for 45 mins and then a 10 mins break. When working from office having a game of ping-pong/pool is a great idea. When remotely just switch off from the computer to relax a bit. This also helps with distractions (e.g. Slack, Email, etc): use that time (and only that time) to manage the distractions so that you can have your full focus while pairing.

* Do frequent retrospectives and give feedback. At the end of the pairing day ask "What did you like/did not like?". Try to be honest: it is important to catch factors that irritate/annoy early and fix them rather than letting them grow into a bitter relation.

More importantly be inclusive: pair programming just doesn't work for everyone, there's no point to force someone in to it. It is worth a try though. I find its benefits hugely overweigh the downsides.

edit: formatting

Re: The mortifying ordeal of pairing all day

#90

Post by hughrr »

harryf wrote: post #80
kstenerud wrote: post #68

Pair programming generates visceral responses due to it being introduced as if it were fact, which for me always triggers my spidey senses. People who didn't like it were told "you're doing it wrong" or "you didn't give it a proper chance". Dismissing criticisms out of hand only furthers distrust, regardless of the actual value of the idea. I played along and paired for awhile, but now steadfastly refuse to pair, eve…

Like many things in programming, we adopt it like a cargo cult ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_programming ) based on "some thought leader said" or "some company has amazing..." without actually doing any serious study. It's actually amazing for an industry that should be all about rational, reasoned analysis, that we're willing to perform such experiments on ourselves with so little evidence to show the v…

I'm actually here because my colleagues keep coming up with things posted here and on other sources and I was intrigued as to the consensus behind them. I'm pleasantly surprised to read that there is a nice critical balance of discussion.

The worry for me is that there is almost always an obvious detachment from the steps carried out to the benefit which is the precise definition of a cargo cult. A lot of people can't seem to see this at all and when asked for some sort of rational proof, something I do regularly, tend to switch to a personal or ideological attack instead.

It's slightly tiring to be fighting the front of rationalism in an industry which appears to be driven partially by fashion.

As for pair programming, 100% anecdotally I find that sometimes you need a second set of eyes on a problem when you can't see the forest for the trees. But mostly it's inefficient and unproductive and absolutely crippling for small teams.

Post reply on HN