>People are free to draw inferences about how it would be to pair with this programmer and why they are rarely paired.
you could. but there's not much to work with. could be helpful but "too valuable" to be a mentor compared to a director or pitching sales or doing conferences. Could be overly pompous and makes things worse. Could simply be office culture and pair programming for more than 15 minutes isn't a thing (like all my previous jobs).
All are extreme assumptions that aren't productive to talk about. Personally: I don't know if I'd want to be in those cultures that enforced pair programming X times a week, but I wouldn't mind , say, a day a month where I could shadow a lead or vice versa and get some intimite knowledge, be it in correcting some pitfalls in my coding or seeing how a more experienced mind ticks. But the chance hasn't come up yet.
I'm rarely paired because pair programming just isn't something we do in the company outside of just helping people with their little issues. It's not an encouraged practice. There's nothing deep about it. It sounds like you're trying to insinuate something negative about me.
I assume they are insinuating that you are coming off as arrogant and only interested in teaching. They should definitely just say so, though.
In a good pairing environment everyone is learning from everyone. You didn't explicitly say you were looking to learn for others though you also didn't explicitly say you weren't. As far as I'm concerned, in the best pairing environments everyone is always pairing with everyone else, not just seniors with juniors. There is the idea that seniors can actually learn from juniors too since juniors will question things seniors haven't thought about in a long time and are living with "I do it like this because it's the way I've always done it" syndrome.
>In a good pairing environment everyone is learning from everyone. You didn't explicitly say you were looking to learn for others though you also didn't explicitly say you weren't.
Well that's the thing. The only reason I'm in a senior position at this company is because I never stopped asking questions and I still don't stop asking questions and learning from people more knowledgeable than me. I used to spend hours sitting at one guys desk just asking questions and listening to rants and just gathering knowledge.
I learned that this was the fastest way to progress and get better at the job, but I'm not finding that juniors and other less experienced devs are doing the same thing because they're worried about wasting people's time. And people are less likely to encourage this behaviour because they have high priority work. I got away with it when I joined the company because the rate of change was so much lower and so things generally just took longer.
I'm actually quite enjoying how divisive a simple quote can be.
I wonder how often I've made a comment and gotten no engagement. This quote seems to have gotten more engagement than the original comment. And quite emotive engagement.
Makes me wonder what that means. Is it genuine curiosity? Or is the quote saying something that the original commenter couldn't see themselves? It's interesting they suggested if I was insinuating something negative about them.
Importantly, they did not ask me. They told me. That too tells us something about what pairing experience with them would be.
Please don't cross into personal attack.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
>I think the quote stands alone.
I disagree.
>People are free to draw inferences about how it would be to pair with this programmer and why they are rarely paired.
you could. but there's not much to work with. could be helpful but "too valuable" to be a mentor compared to a director or pitching sales or doing conferences. Could be overly pompous and makes things worse. Could simply be office culture and pair programming for more than 15 minutes isn't a thing (like all my previous jobs).
All are extreme assumptions that aren't productive to talk about. Personally: I don't know if I'd want to be in those cultures that enforced pair programming X times a week, but I wouldn't mind , say, a day a month where I could shadow a lead or vice versa and get some intimite knowledge, be it in correcting some pitfalls in my coding or seeing how a more experienced mind ticks. But the chance hasn't come up yet.
I'm rarely paired because pair programming just isn't something we do in the company outside of just helping people with their little issues. It's not an encouraged practice. There's nothing deep about it. It sounds like you're trying to insinuate something negative about me.
I assume they are insinuating that you are coming off as arrogant and only interested in teaching. They should definitely just say so, though.
In a good pairing environment everyone is learning from everyone. You didn't explicitly say you were looking to learn for others though you also didn't explicitly say you weren't. As far as I'm concerned, in the best pairing environments everyone is always pairing with everyone else, not just seniors with juniors. There is the idea that seniors can actually learn from juniors too since juniors will question things seniors haven't thought about in a long time and are living with "I do it like this because it's the way I've always done it" syndrome.
PS, love the username :)
>In a good pairing environment everyone is learning from everyone. You didn't explicitly say you were looking to learn for others though you also didn't explicitly say you weren't.
Well that's the thing. The only reason I'm in a senior position at this company is because I never stopped asking questions and I still don't stop asking questions and learning from people more knowledgeable than me. I used to spend hours sitting at one guys desk just asking questions and listening to rants and just gathering knowledge.
I learned that this was the fastest way to progress and get better at the job, but I'm not finding that juniors and other less experienced devs are doing the same thing because they're worried about wasting people's time. And people are less likely to encourage this behaviour because they have high priority work. I got away with it when I joined the company because the rate of change was so much lower and so things generally just took longer.
1 reply →
Just say whatever point it is you are trying to make instead of making people guess
I'm actually quite enjoying how divisive a simple quote can be.
I wonder how often I've made a comment and gotten no engagement. This quote seems to have gotten more engagement than the original comment. And quite emotive engagement.
Makes me wonder what that means. Is it genuine curiosity? Or is the quote saying something that the original commenter couldn't see themselves? It's interesting they suggested if I was insinuating something negative about them.
Importantly, they did not ask me. They told me. That too tells us something about what pairing experience with them would be.
> I'm actually quite enjoying how divisive a simple quote can be
The word for that is "trolling".
> Importantly, they did not ask me. They told me. That too tells us something about what pairing experience with them would be.
I asked and you avoided answering. What does that tell us?
1 reply →