Python's popularity statistics

[rzed]

"Skip Montanaro" <skip at pobox.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1039801638.27016.python-list at python.org...
>
>     Dick> I suspect that if almost any of us had Cameron sitting
beside us,
>     Dick> we'd be better programmers, but I don't know that it's
fair to
>     Dick> extend that concept to cover *all* of Pair Programming. If
you had
>     Dick> *me* as the other pair half, for instance ...
>
> Long before the "Pair Programming" buzzphrase was invented, I shared
an
> office with another software engineer type.  If I got really stuck
on
> something, I'd ask Fred to take a look.  Often, as I was explaining
the
> problem to Fred, I'd figure out what I'd done wrong.  Fred would
never say a
> word and walk back to his desk.
>
> I think the world would probably be a better place if everybody had
a
> blow-up doll to talk to. ;-)
>

"Laura Creighton" <lac at strakt.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1039801829.30956.python-list at python.org...
[...]
> I get my code fixed better when the
> person at our company who just figured out why classes are a cool
idea
> sits beside me rather than when Alex Martelli does.  When I begin to
> write poor code, Alex frequently thinks that there is some deeper
wiser
> reason that I am doing what I am doing.  The other person just says
> 'I don't understand why you are doing that.  is that a good thing to
do?'
> And I look at it, and say 'no.' and then fix the thing.
>
> Of course if you want 'an algorithm to accomplish effect-X which you
> know you want but haven't a clue how to do' Alex is your man.
>

Both points taken. The "explain it to the village idiot" phenomenon is
one I'm familiar with (occasionally I am even on the speaking end).
It's not that I'm dubious about Pair Programming, actually. I think
it's a good idea if done right.

I was fortunate early in my career to be working with the equivalent
of an Alex, and it was a heady experience. Very productive. In my
pair-programming experience, though, I've come to believe you really
need an unbalanced pair like that; it gives the less-skilled member a
chance to contribute by keying (and occasionally catching fuzzy
thinking) and frees up the more-skilled member for on-the-fly
designing. A more balanced pair tends to develop into a "fine! we'll
do it your way!" affair with shouting and sulking. I'd be interested
in hearing how that compares with others' experience.

--
rzed