3 ms·

No, but at the same time, I wonder if being a terrible typist is a little like riding my bike with a rusty chain. Maybe my riding is more about where than how f

No, but at the same time, I wonder if being a terrible typist is a little like riding my bike with a rusty chain. Maybe my riding is more about where than how fast, but whatever my speed, there must be a decent return on being more efficient. If I typed more quickly, maybe I would have more time for thinking. That might be very important.

rbxbx 16y ago
Perhaps while hunting that next key, you'll have realized a better solution. Perhaps knowing the eventual time you must spend to type causes you to think more before you begin typing... Who's to say? That said, I can't imagine those blog posts come out quickly :)
gaustin 16y ago
I probably spend less time thinking thoroughly because I can type fluently. If I typed slower, I'd have to be more confident that what I was typing was reasonable. It's probably just a discipline issue on my part.
- alextgordon 16y ago
  When I.....'m writing ... I make lots of pauses .... to.. give.. me.. time.. to think. In ......... my opinion it's impo..r..t..ant to make ... these pauses.. when programming .... otherwise you might ... miss ................ something important.
petercooper 16y ago
If I typed more quickly, maybe I would have more time for thinking. That might be very important. Maybe, but I don't personally buy it (as a fast typer myself). I think programming shares a lot with writing where the editing is more important than the first draft. In my experience, typing speed doesn't significantly affect the quality of a writer's work, though perhaps it does the quantity. You are proof of this. From what I've seen, your writing is good and goes down well on HN, yet you've identified as a "slow" typist. I don't see why your code should be any different.
- loup-vaillant 16y ago
  For me, it had a great impact. Typing faster means that I'm now more inclined to review and rewrite my work. Plus, writing more helps me write better, over time.
- nerfhammer 16y ago
  I think being an efficient typist is a vast improvement. - You don't get constantly interrupted looking for a key. Seriously, remember what this was like before you could type. Being able to type without thinking about it must free up a lot of mental energy and allow you to concentrate. - If typing is easy, you tend to write more. You don't care if you have to rewrite a function. You don't mind using longer, more self-documenting variable names that make your code clearer.
scott_s 16y ago
Something being able to type fast buys is you less friction when experimenting. The act of typing is not a mental hurdle to stop you from following through on "I wonder what it would be like if..."
ghshephard 16y ago
Our VP of engineering, who I respect a great deal (Basically has excelled as a programmer, developer, architect, manager, and executive - and has created a _ton_ of high quality code in the last five years) is adamant that his developers can type 30+ WPM - the good news is that's a pretty rare person these days who can't touch type, particularly for the younger developers - but he did have a "hunt-n-peck" developer who he pretty much demanded they learn to touch type, even if it meant spending an hour each day improving their skills. I tend to agree - when a developer is on a tear, and creating great code, the _last_ thing you want to have standing between them and their masterpiece is a 20 WPM habit.
- silentbicycle 16y ago
  I don't know where this fits, but I used to hunt and peck at over 80 wpm* . I touch-type on dvorak now, I don't care about the speed (roughly same, clearly fast enough), but it feels much better than hunt-and-peck or qwerty touch typing. * Hey, I taught myself to type as a kid, playing text adventure games and typing in BASIC programs from library books.
  - sliverstorm 16y ago
    I doubt there was much 'hunting' going on if you were really doing 80wpm. I'd bet you had some kind of hybrid form going on; anybody who types that fast is usually reaching for the next letter before they finish stroking the current letter.
- ido 16y ago
  What I don't really get is: how can you even become a good programmer without getting really good at typing as a side effect? I never learned how to type, I just got good at it without trying since I've been using computers for >20 years. Surely most if not all good programmers have at very least been using computers for a long while before becoming good programmers?
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
edderly 16y ago
A lot of horseshit is talked about how quickly you can type. Fundamentally, I assert it's really pretty unlikely that your throughput at the keyboard is a limiting factor to your productivity when writing code. It certainly is limiting if you're transcribing speech to text. To code: it's doubtfully reliable as a measure unless you're Rainman or worst case "headbanger" coders who substitute knowledge of what they write for knowledge of the result of what they execute. Remember, you could always see someone post about how lines of code produced does not equal productivity. There's a recurring post about the guy who considered productive being reducing the size of his code. Don't get me wrong, typing is a useful skill and good on those who master it at a high level. However it's no substitute for 'working smart' for e.g. : Writing scripts when you need to. Knowing your editor inside out. Knowing your SCM (of choice) well. etc. At best I suspect the 'don't type fast' thing just seems to be indicative of the duffers in the industry who are just sucking a paycheck out of your company. Don't let it fool you that it's a definitive metric of software competency though.
- slantyyz 16y ago
  You're right. When I'm writing code, I often don't find the typing to be my impediment. My first ideas are usually not quite distilled, and after the initial burst (or brain fart) of code, I spend a lot of time reducing/refactoring the code.
loup-vaillant 16y ago
I'd be curious to know your actual typing speed. Maybe you're not that slow? Under 30 WPM, learning touch-typing should be a top priority. (Use Dvorak if you type mainly in English, it's 4 times as fast to learn than Qwerty.) Not having to lower your eyes and your head any more is so much more comfortable that it quickly becomes addictive. Of course, you will be slow at first, but you can get your speed back in two weeks (maybe even faster if you choose a Dvorak layout). 50 WPM (my speed, getting better over time) feels pretty comfortable, though Id' like to type a bit faster. If you hunt-and peck at that speed, touch typing will only buy you the comfort, but even that may be worth it. 90WPM is the speed of speech. Any faster is for contests.
- kragen 16y ago
  90WPM is the speed of speech. Any faster is for contests. Speech speeds for speeches and books on tape, where the listener can't interrupt and ask you to repeat, are typically around 150WPM http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/aug00.asp http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/aug00.asp but normal conversation is up around 170-280WPM http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003423.html http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003423.h... and court reporters need to be able to transcribe speech at over 180wpm and typically 200wpm http://www.thehighschoolgraduate.com/editorial/DF/courtreporting.htm http://www.thehighschoolgraduate.com/editorial/DF/courtrepor... . Try reading aloud something you're typing as you're typing it. You'll find that 90wpm is very slow speech. The only reason speeds like 50wpm and 90wpm can feel comfortable is that the actual process of typing is distracting enough that we don't have time to get bored.q
  - loup-vaillant 16y ago
    OK, thanks for the correction.

rbxbx 16y ago

Perhaps while hunting that next key, you'll have realized a better solution. Perhaps knowing the eventual time you must spend to type causes you to think more before you begin typing... Who's to say? That said, I can't imagine those blog posts come out quickly :)

gaustin 16y ago

I probably spend less time thinking thoroughly because I can type fluently. If I typed slower, I'd have to be more confident that what I was typing was reasonable. It's probably just a discipline issue on my part.

alextgordon 16y ago
When I.....'m writing ... I make lots of pauses .... to.. give.. me.. time.. to think. In ......... my opinion it's impo..r..t..ant to make ... these pauses.. when programming .... otherwise you might ... miss ................ something important.

petercooper 16y ago

If I typed more quickly, maybe I would have more time for thinking. That might be very important. Maybe, but I don't personally buy it (as a fast typer myself). I think programming shares a lot with writing where the editing is more important than the first draft. In my experience, typing speed doesn't significantly affect the quality of a writer's work, though perhaps it does the quantity. You are proof of this. From what I've seen, your writing is good and goes down well on HN, yet you've identified as a "slow" typist. I don't see why your code should be any different.

loup-vaillant 16y ago
For me, it had a great impact. Typing faster means that I'm now more inclined to review and rewrite my work. Plus, writing more helps me write better, over time.
nerfhammer 16y ago
I think being an efficient typist is a vast improvement. - You don't get constantly interrupted looking for a key. Seriously, remember what this was like before you could type. Being able to type without thinking about it must free up a lot of mental energy and allow you to concentrate. - If typing is easy, you tend to write more. You don't care if you have to rewrite a function. You don't mind using longer, more self-documenting variable names that make your code clearer.

scott_s 16y ago

Something being able to type fast buys is you less friction when experimenting. The act of typing is not a mental hurdle to stop you from following through on "I wonder what it would be like if..."

ghshephard 16y ago

Our VP of engineering, who I respect a great deal (Basically has excelled as a programmer, developer, architect, manager, and executive - and has created a _ton_ of high quality code in the last five years) is adamant that his developers can type 30+ WPM - the good news is that's a pretty rare person these days who can't touch type, particularly for the younger developers - but he did have a "hunt-n-peck" developer who he pretty much demanded they learn to touch type, even if it meant spending an hour each day improving their skills. I tend to agree - when a developer is on a tear, and creating great code, the _last_ thing you want to have standing between them and their masterpiece is a 20 WPM habit.

silentbicycle 16y ago
I don't know where this fits, but I used to hunt and peck at over 80 wpm* . I touch-type on dvorak now, I don't care about the speed (roughly same, clearly fast enough), but it feels much better than hunt-and-peck or qwerty touch typing. * Hey, I taught myself to type as a kid, playing text adventure games and typing in BASIC programs from library books.
- sliverstorm 16y ago
  I doubt there was much 'hunting' going on if you were really doing 80wpm. I'd bet you had some kind of hybrid form going on; anybody who types that fast is usually reaching for the next letter before they finish stroking the current letter.
ido 16y ago
What I don't really get is: how can you even become a good programmer without getting really good at typing as a side effect? I never learned how to type, I just got good at it without trying since I've been using computers for >20 years. Surely most if not all good programmers have at very least been using computers for a long while before becoming good programmers?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]

edderly 16y ago

A lot of horseshit is talked about how quickly you can type. Fundamentally, I assert it's really pretty unlikely that your throughput at the keyboard is a limiting factor to your productivity when writing code. It certainly is limiting if you're transcribing speech to text. To code: it's doubtfully reliable as a measure unless you're Rainman or worst case "headbanger" coders who substitute knowledge of what they write for knowledge of the result of what they execute. Remember, you could always see someone post about how lines of code produced does not equal productivity. There's a recurring post about the guy who considered productive being reducing the size of his code. Don't get me wrong, typing is a useful skill and good on those who master it at a high level. However it's no substitute for 'working smart' for e.g. : Writing scripts when you need to. Knowing your editor inside out. Knowing your SCM (of choice) well. etc. At best I suspect the 'don't type fast' thing just seems to be indicative of the duffers in the industry who are just sucking a paycheck out of your company. Don't let it fool you that it's a definitive metric of software competency though.

slantyyz 16y ago
You're right. When I'm writing code, I often don't find the typing to be my impediment. My first ideas are usually not quite distilled, and after the initial burst (or brain fart) of code, I spend a lot of time reducing/refactoring the code.

loup-vaillant 16y ago

I'd be curious to know your actual typing speed. Maybe you're not that slow? Under 30 WPM, learning touch-typing should be a top priority. (Use Dvorak if you type mainly in English, it's 4 times as fast to learn than Qwerty.) Not having to lower your eyes and your head any more is so much more comfortable that it quickly becomes addictive. Of course, you will be slow at first, but you can get your speed back in two weeks (maybe even faster if you choose a Dvorak layout). 50 WPM (my speed, getting better over time) feels pretty comfortable, though Id' like to type a bit faster. If you hunt-and peck at that speed, touch typing will only buy you the comfort, but even that may be worth it. 90WPM is the speed of speech. Any faster is for contests.

kragen 16y ago
90WPM is the speed of speech. Any faster is for contests. Speech speeds for speeches and books on tape, where the listener can't interrupt and ask you to repeat, are typically around 150WPM http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/aug00.asp http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/aug00.asp but normal conversation is up around 170-280WPM http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003423.html http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003423.h... and court reporters need to be able to transcribe speech at over 180wpm and typically 200wpm http://www.thehighschoolgraduate.com/editorial/DF/courtreporting.htm http://www.thehighschoolgraduate.com/editorial/DF/courtrepor... . Try reading aloud something you're typing as you're typing it. You'll find that 90wpm is very slow speech. The only reason speeds like 50wpm and 90wpm can feel comfortable is that the actual process of typing is distracting enough that we don't have time to get bored.q
- loup-vaillant 16y ago
  OK, thanks for the correction.