4 ms·

Living coding isn't lazy, unpracticed living coding is lazy. I find live coding to be a lot more effective than explaining code that's already there; as a speak

Living coding isn't lazy, unpracticed living coding is lazy. I find live coding to be a lot more effective than explaining code that's already there; as a speaker, you have the opportunity to explain the reasoning behind and relationships between each line of code.

imh 11y ago
I think OP addresses that concern: >That does not mean you shouldn’t show code on stage. Please, by all means, put code up there on your slide and talk about it. Just don’t write it in real time. Live coding is lazy; it is a shortcut for creating quality presentation material. On well-prepared slides, your code will be magnified to ensure that I can read it. It will be highlighted so that you can direct my attention appropriately.
- GhotiFish 11y ago
  Well, there is some ambiguity here. I would say that I much prefer live coding to code on slides because I can see it actually compile and run. Proof that what is said works, works. I might even get to see common gotchas. It's obviously a gigantic failure if we only see errors and never working code, but then that speaks to the nature of what is being demonstrated. With presentations, you can show a chunk of code with a presenter confidently stating "This works!". Of course, that's no guarantee that it does, and frankly if you tried to implement what was demonstrated and it ends up not working, you would get blamed for it. "You clearly did it wrong, you were supposed to do it like this: ". Live coding shows you all the context, because you must show all the context, and it gives you a concrete example that you can yourself run. A working hello world. It does something critically important, it takes the blame of something not working for you, off of you. of course the ambiguity I mentioned are the golang slides, which are actually demonstrable pieces of code. With a little "run this for yourself" button on each slide. That's a really awesome solution.

imh 11y ago

I think OP addresses that concern: >That does not mean you shouldn’t show code on stage. Please, by all means, put code up there on your slide and talk about it. Just don’t write it in real time. Live coding is lazy; it is a shortcut for creating quality presentation material. On well-prepared slides, your code will be magnified to ensure that I can read it. It will be highlighted so that you can direct my attention appropriately.

GhotiFish 11y ago
Well, there is some ambiguity here. I would say that I much prefer live coding to code on slides because I can see it actually compile and run. Proof that what is said works, works. I might even get to see common gotchas. It's obviously a gigantic failure if we only see errors and never working code, but then that speaks to the nature of what is being demonstrated. With presentations, you can show a chunk of code with a presenter confidently stating "This works!". Of course, that's no guarantee that it does, and frankly if you tried to implement what was demonstrated and it ends up not working, you would get blamed for it. "You clearly did it wrong, you were supposed to do it like this: ". Live coding shows you all the context, because you must show all the context, and it gives you a concrete example that you can yourself run. A working hello world. It does something critically important, it takes the blame of something not working for you, off of you. of course the ambiguity I mentioned are the golang slides, which are actually demonstrable pieces of code. With a little "run this for yourself" button on each slide. That's a really awesome solution.