be aware that folks are different. Not everybody is fan of pair programming. Fore some, following some online courses is a better match. Or even reading a book. Best would be your organisation provides some self-made tutorials, programming guidelines with a lot of examples, template code and snippets to pick from.
My observation: pair programming often leads to silo-thinking and micro-standards but seldom to the quality standards you might need for larger projects. PP heavily depends on the people. Unfortunately the best folks for PP are the most absorbed ones. Knowledge extraction and distribution processes are - at larger organisations and over a longer time period - more important than PP - my very personal observation.
Agreed, but I do think it's a skill that everyone should learn.
I've never worked in a larger org so can't comment on your other points, but I'm tempted to believe that if pair programming leads to "silo-thinking and micro-standards" then you have a much bigger problem that isn't pair programming's fault 🤷♀️
Dear Carolyn,
When you "think" about stuff, that you have never seen, does not make you a professional :-)
It's just wild guessing and is one of the problems that is holding startups back from scaling and growing fast.
All this has nothing to do with IT but with human nature. I am not saying that pair programming is bad. But it is not enough. When you just have pair programming without a programme around it that makes sure, the the right and always different pairs are built, different characters are addressed their way to learn best, trainers are trained and rewarded, folks are fired who never learn, remain dependent on others, never pay back or contribute etc. - you know - all the general HR stuff - you will get efficiency and motivational problems only Microsofts and Googles can afford - but will take lifes when you are an airplane or car manufacturer, responsible for a nuclear power plant etc. ;-)
// , “It is not so important to be serious as it is to be serious about the important things. The monkey wears an expression of seriousness... but the monkey is serious because he itches."(No/No)
Seems like you speak from bitter experience, here.
When you just have pair programming without a programme around it that makes sure, the the right and always different pairs are built, different characters are addressed their way to learn best, trainers are trained and rewarded, folks are fired who never learn, remain dependent on others, never pay back or contribute etc. - you know - all the general HR stuff - you will get efficiency and motivational problems only Microsofts and Googles can afford - but will take lifes when you are an airplane or car manufacturer, responsible for a nuclear power plant etc.
And there's more to the merits of coders learning to pair program than wild guesses. I don't think anybody's saying it's something everyone should do, but it there may be some benefit to learn it in case it's useful in the future, with the right company, colleagues, or program. Tools in the toolbox, and all that.
I have always hated pair programming, as a junior and as a senior dev. It has never not made me feel uncomfortable personally, on either side of it. It's not quite as bad virtually, but still far from great.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
be aware that folks are different. Not everybody is fan of pair programming. Fore some, following some online courses is a better match. Or even reading a book. Best would be your organisation provides some self-made tutorials, programming guidelines with a lot of examples, template code and snippets to pick from.
My observation: pair programming often leads to silo-thinking and micro-standards but seldom to the quality standards you might need for larger projects. PP heavily depends on the people. Unfortunately the best folks for PP are the most absorbed ones. Knowledge extraction and distribution processes are - at larger organisations and over a longer time period - more important than PP - my very personal observation.
Agreed, but I do think it's a skill that everyone should learn.
I've never worked in a larger org so can't comment on your other points, but I'm tempted to believe that if pair programming leads to "silo-thinking and micro-standards" then you have a much bigger problem that isn't pair programming's fault 🤷♀️
Dear Carolyn,
When you "think" about stuff, that you have never seen, does not make you a professional :-)
It's just wild guessing and is one of the problems that is holding startups back from scaling and growing fast.
All this has nothing to do with IT but with human nature. I am not saying that pair programming is bad. But it is not enough. When you just have pair programming without a programme around it that makes sure, the the right and always different pairs are built, different characters are addressed their way to learn best, trainers are trained and rewarded, folks are fired who never learn, remain dependent on others, never pay back or contribute etc. - you know - all the general HR stuff - you will get efficiency and motivational problems only Microsofts and Googles can afford - but will take lifes when you are an airplane or car manufacturer, responsible for a nuclear power plant etc. ;-)
Seems like you speak from bitter experience, here.
And there's more to the merits of coders learning to pair program than wild guesses. I don't think anybody's saying it's something everyone should do, but it there may be some benefit to learn it in case it's useful in the future, with the right company, colleagues, or program. Tools in the toolbox, and all that.
I have always hated pair programming, as a junior and as a senior dev. It has never not made me feel uncomfortable personally, on either side of it. It's not quite as bad virtually, but still far from great.