RE: Two persons per product"

["jt" <jt@xxxxxx>]

Can't agree more.  But unless you've done it, may not seem possible.  I've
never tried alternating like that.  Probably would work best.

The KEY is the focus of the person who's not keying.  That's the tough job,
keeping up with the other, as the fingers can work quicker than the brain,
sometimes (sometimes...?!?  LOL...!).  The other KEY is that the person can
accept criticism.  That's where I've found the apprenticeship approach works
well, as there are "roles", as long as the "master" doesn't mind learning
from the "apprentice".

I gather you've had more experience than I have, Leif.  My experience is
that this works in small doses.  A few hours a day.  I've not had much luck
with day-in and day-out...  What about you...?

I've found it to be much tougher to pair two "masters".  I've had luck
pairing two "apprentices" but I didn't actually observe them working
together, much, at the time.  I've found complementary personalities to be
the bigger factor.


(Tired, so will look forward to reply tomorrow, if any.)




| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Leif Svalgaard
| Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 11:32 PM
| To: midrange-l@midrange.com
| Subject: Two persons per product"
|
|
| From: Brad Jensen
| > debugging yes, writing no
|
| I have on many occasions practiced the "two-person" method.
| One person at the keyboard, the other one criticizing and correcting;
| change places every 30 minutes. This actually works with "truly"
| professional people. Also in other professions. One measure of
| being professional is the "interchangeability" of persons.
| "Cowboy" mentality is not desirable. Unfortunately, many (most?)
| programmers see it otherwise. This contributes to keeping our
| field one predominantly dominated by amateurs.