The best ideas are the crazy ones. If you have a crazy idea and it works, it's really valuable.—Kent Beck
How to Ask Questions | How to Answer Questions | Format Your Code
Out on HF and heard nobody, but didn't call CQ? Nobody heard you either. 73 de N7GH
Monica Shiralkar wrote:
Without pair programming , suppose developer X and Developer Y would have been working on Task 1 ans Task 2 today.
Now, with pair programming both spent their entire time today doing Task 1. So what have they achieved more than in the above case ? Is it improved quality, reduced rework , lesser time or any other benifit as compared to the above case ?
The best ideas are the crazy ones. If you have a crazy idea and it works, it's really valuable.—Kent Beck
How to Ask Questions | How to Answer Questions | Format Your Code
There are only two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors
Campbell Ritchie wrote:You are particularly trying to improve the quality of the code in its first pass.
Les Morgan wrote:Monika,
I look at pair programming--I just call it collaboration--as getting the best from more than one source, resulting in getting a better product.
Junilu Lacar wrote:
When done effectively, collaborative development results in better quality code, tests, and a shared understanding between developers of how and why the code was written the way it was. .
fred rosenberger wrote:Let us also not forget the learning aspect. You can pair a junior and senior developer together. Or even a "database" person with a "GUI" person. Both will learn from each other, and become better, more rounded developers. Or a "business process" person with an "algorithms" person...And now you have TWO people who have worked on the code, both of whom have an understanding of it. The next day, they can be paired with someone else and spread the knowledge further.
Monica Shiralkar wrote:if you compare it to the case how the code quality would have been had the senior programmer been doing it alone ,then there may not be a difference in code quality.
The best ideas are the crazy ones. If you have a crazy idea and it works, it's really valuable.—Kent Beck
How to Ask Questions | How to Answer Questions | Format Your Code
Monica Shiralkar wrote:I think if there is a senior programmer working with a fresher, the code quality would improve compared to the case of what the quality had been had only the fresher been working on it. But if you compare it to the case how the code quality would have been had the senior programmer been doing it alone ,then there may not be a difference in code quality.
Out on HF and heard nobody, but didn't call CQ? Nobody heard you either. 73 de N7GH
Les Morgan wrote:
If you are collaborating, then the solution really is better than any one in the project could have ever delivered.
Monica Shiralkar wrote:[We have a task and an acceptance criteria.It has to be done exactly that way.
By better code what I understand is that although it will do the same thing as it was supposed to be done (as per the acceptance criteria), it would have fewer bugs. Is that all ?
Paul Clapham wrote:
The idea that with two programmers, one of them can point out a better way to the other which might have been missed;
Paul Clapham wrote: the idea that after the code is finished you have two programmers who know something about the code instead of one
Paul Clapham wrote:. The idea that with two programmers, one of them can point out a better way to the other which might have been missed; or the idea that after the code is finished you have two programmers who know something about the code instead of one;
Monica Shiralkar wrote:The latter looks a bigger advantage to me of pair programming than the former.
Paul Clapham wrote:And the senior programmer might point out to the junior programmer that, instead of writing 20 lines of code to do some particular thing, they could call a method in some other class which already does that thing.
Monica Shiralkar wrote:
Paul Clapham wrote:
The idea that with two programmers, one of them can point out a better way to the other which might have been missed;
Yes, and that's why I had said "lesser bugs".
The best ideas are the crazy ones. If you have a crazy idea and it works, it's really valuable.—Kent Beck
How to Ask Questions | How to Answer Questions | Format Your Code
Dave Tolls wrote:
Writing by myself any code makes perfect sense...funnily enough that's not always the case when someone else has to work with that code.
Pairing helps to produce code that is more likely to make sense to more people.
Monica Shiralkar wrote:
But aren't good developers already writing such code without depending upon any pair programming ?
Al Hobbs wrote:I think pair programming would be ideally used to help junior developers. The only time senior developers would do that is for fun or they have a long time to finish. Two developers doing pair programming makes development slower than one developer alone.
The best ideas are the crazy ones. If you have a crazy idea and it works, it's really valuable.—Kent Beck
How to Ask Questions | How to Answer Questions | Format Your Code
Al Hobbs wrote:I think pair programming would be ideally used to help junior developers. The only time senior developers would do that is for fun or they have a long time to finish. Two developers doing pair programming makes development slower than one developer alone.
The best ideas are the crazy ones. If you have a crazy idea and it works, it's really valuable.—Kent Beck
How to Ask Questions | How to Answer Questions | Format Your Code
[OCP 11 book] | [OCA 8 book] [OCP 8 book] [Practice tests book] [Blog] [JavaRanch FAQ] [How To Ask Questions] [Book Promos]
Other Certs: SCEA Part 1, Part 2 & 3, Core Spring 3, TOGAF part 1 and part 2
Monica Shiralkar wrote:Also I feel pair programming would be more beneficial in product based companies than in the service industry.
Monica Shiralkar wrote:What I understand is it should not become a habbit for any developer that when I do pair programming my other developer pairing with me makes sure that we are doing it correctly and later when I am doing it alone (without pair programming ) I do mistakes because there is no other developer paried with me now who would have ensured that we do it correctly.
The best ideas are the crazy ones. If you have a crazy idea and it works, it's really valuable.—Kent Beck
How to Ask Questions | How to Answer Questions | Format Your Code
The best ideas are the crazy ones. If you have a crazy idea and it works, it's really valuable.—Kent Beck
How to Ask Questions | How to Answer Questions | Format Your Code
Jeanne Boyarsky wrote:Monica,
It doesn't mean you rely on the other person. It means that two people are more likely to spot errors. In fact even the person typing is less likely to make errors because there is communication and explaining.
Paul Clapham wrote:
I don't know what you mean by "product-based company" and "service industry". Could you explain the difference? And then it would be interesting to hear why you think pair-programming is more beneficial to one rather than the other.
salvin francis wrote:For having a question mentioned in the January 2021 CodeRanch Journal, congratulations: this question earns you a cow
Junilu Lacar wrote:
A skilled solo programmer can write well-factored and expressive code, sometimes even better that what a pair or mob might produce. However, in my experience there aren't very many programmers like that out there. Most programmers would do better working in a pair or mob. All programmers can benefit from pairing/mobbing if they would only spend some time trying to learn and do it properly.
Junilu Lacar wrote: Usually, when programmers are working solo, their main focus is implementation and they can't easily switch back and forth between the strategic (high-level abstract) and tactical (implementation details) modes of thinking.
look! it's a bird! it's a plane! It's .... a teeny tiny ad
SKIP - a book about connecting industrious people with elderly land owners
https://coderanch.com/t/skip-book
|