3 ms·

Who are they? What do they do?

Moru 9y ago
Everything. Touchtyping is just not a focus in school any more. Teachers look funny at you when you ask when the kids start touchtyping. They are expected to figure it out themselves. Very funny.
fao_ 9y ago
Anyone. I didn't learn to touch type and I'm about as fast as a touchtypist. Indeed, my typing speed went down when I started learning and because I didn't finish, hasn't really recovered since. 99% of programming is thinking and structuring though, so touch-typing isn't all that useful. https://phys.org/news/2016-02-ten-fingers-fast.html https://phys.org/news/2016-02-ten-fingers-fast.html http://www.i-programmer.info/news/99-professional/9427-you-dont-need-to-touch-type-to-go-fast.html http://www.i-programmer.info/news/99-professional/9427-you-d... https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c366/89b3803e8744b14bc50998c69b7b91956aa5.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c366/89b3803e8744b14bc50998...
- brucephillips 9y ago
  Do you really spend 1% of your programming time typing? I find that hard to believe.
  - fao_ 9y ago
    I wonder what it is with hacker news and the inability of people on it to understand simple dramatic exaggeration. A more realistic estimate would be something like 40%. When I choose to, I write C or Erlang, so there is generally not much boilerplate needed in making things go. I would say 60% of my work is architectural stuff. How things should be designed, named, structured. What parts should plug into what, what functions and set of systems of POSIX to use, what makes most sense for future reading, etc.
- computerex 9y ago
  I looked at the PDF paper and the results and I don't agree with the conclusions being drawn. The main issue I see from cursory skim is that the 30 participants had a range of typing speeds from 34-79 WPM. I don't consider these individuals typing specialists or professionals based on the low WPM. Now if you consider professionals where they have a requirement of something like 90+ WPM, then I think you are going to see very few people who are not touch typists because it'd be very difficult or maybe even impossible to reach those WPM without touch typing. I think a better conclusion to draw from the study is that touch typing isn't as useful for the lower end of the WPM spectrum. For example, if you are typing at 50 WPM, touch typing vs non-touch typing isn't going to make too much of a difference. The fastest typists in the world though are touch typists. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9EXEpjSDEw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9EXEpjSDEw As for > 99% of programming is thinking and structuring though, so touch-typing isn't all that useful. I don't think typing speed is the biggest factor in productivity in programming, but I think you are downplaying it too much. Effective use of keyboard shortcuts, using vim, and having a high WPM typing speed has noticeably increased my productivity.
  - brucephillips 9y ago
    Not to mention that when assessing the productivity of information workers, you must also consider the vastly faster feedback loop of seeing what you're typing on the screen in real time, rather than typing in bursts then looking back up in the stream.
  - fao_ 9y ago
    > then I think you are going to see very few people who are not touch typists because it'd be very difficult or maybe even impossible to reach those WPM without touch typing. Anecdata, but: I got ~160 WPM without learning touch typing. I was a regular computer user from the age of 12.
    - ashark 9y ago
      > I got ~160 WPM without learning touch typing. ...what? What kind of error-rate? How long could you sustain that? How'd you manage that speed having to glance between source and keyboard? I'm pretty sure I was the fastest in my high school typing class (because I already knew how to type very well by then) and at my best I could stay a little over 100wpm for a minute or two without any errors, but it was hard. I could maybe get up around 120-130 transcribing speech and letting minor errors slip though. I doubt I get much over 90wpm at my best these days but it's still fast enough to draw the occasional "whoa!" from people watching me. 160 seems... crazy if you're not touch typing, and way above normal even if you are. [EDIT] sorry about the tone, I'm not saying you're lying, that's just... wow. Crazy fast. Must have really surprised some people, haha.

Moru 9y ago

Everything. Touchtyping is just not a focus in school any more. Teachers look funny at you when you ask when the kids start touchtyping. They are expected to figure it out themselves. Very funny.

fao_ 9y ago

Anyone. I didn't learn to touch type and I'm about as fast as a touchtypist. Indeed, my typing speed went down when I started learning and because I didn't finish, hasn't really recovered since. 99% of programming is thinking and structuring though, so touch-typing isn't all that useful. https://phys.org/news/2016-02-ten-fingers-fast.html https://phys.org/news/2016-02-ten-fingers-fast.html http://www.i-programmer.info/news/99-professional/9427-you-dont-need-to-touch-type-to-go-fast.html http://www.i-programmer.info/news/99-professional/9427-you-d... https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c366/89b3803e8744b14bc50998c69b7b91956aa5.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c366/89b3803e8744b14bc50998...

brucephillips 9y ago
Do you really spend 1% of your programming time typing? I find that hard to believe.
- fao_ 9y ago
  I wonder what it is with hacker news and the inability of people on it to understand simple dramatic exaggeration. A more realistic estimate would be something like 40%. When I choose to, I write C or Erlang, so there is generally not much boilerplate needed in making things go. I would say 60% of my work is architectural stuff. How things should be designed, named, structured. What parts should plug into what, what functions and set of systems of POSIX to use, what makes most sense for future reading, etc.
computerex 9y ago
I looked at the PDF paper and the results and I don't agree with the conclusions being drawn. The main issue I see from cursory skim is that the 30 participants had a range of typing speeds from 34-79 WPM. I don't consider these individuals typing specialists or professionals based on the low WPM. Now if you consider professionals where they have a requirement of something like 90+ WPM, then I think you are going to see very few people who are not touch typists because it'd be very difficult or maybe even impossible to reach those WPM without touch typing. I think a better conclusion to draw from the study is that touch typing isn't as useful for the lower end of the WPM spectrum. For example, if you are typing at 50 WPM, touch typing vs non-touch typing isn't going to make too much of a difference. The fastest typists in the world though are touch typists. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9EXEpjSDEw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9EXEpjSDEw As for > 99% of programming is thinking and structuring though, so touch-typing isn't all that useful. I don't think typing speed is the biggest factor in productivity in programming, but I think you are downplaying it too much. Effective use of keyboard shortcuts, using vim, and having a high WPM typing speed has noticeably increased my productivity.
- brucephillips 9y ago
  Not to mention that when assessing the productivity of information workers, you must also consider the vastly faster feedback loop of seeing what you're typing on the screen in real time, rather than typing in bursts then looking back up in the stream.
- fao_ 9y ago
  > then I think you are going to see very few people who are not touch typists because it'd be very difficult or maybe even impossible to reach those WPM without touch typing. Anecdata, but: I got ~160 WPM without learning touch typing. I was a regular computer user from the age of 12.
  - ashark 9y ago
    > I got ~160 WPM without learning touch typing. ...what? What kind of error-rate? How long could you sustain that? How'd you manage that speed having to glance between source and keyboard? I'm pretty sure I was the fastest in my high school typing class (because I already knew how to type very well by then) and at my best I could stay a little over 100wpm for a minute or two without any errors, but it was hard. I could maybe get up around 120-130 transcribing speech and letting minor errors slip though. I doubt I get much over 90wpm at my best these days but it's still fast enough to draw the occasional "whoa!" from people watching me. 160 seems... crazy if you're not touch typing, and way above normal even if you are. [EDIT] sorry about the tone, I'm not saying you're lying, that's just... wow. Crazy fast. Must have really surprised some people, haha.