First, let's agree on the definition of mundane as used here. To me, your use of mundane suggests the task of writing a program after high-level questions, wha

First, let's agree on the definition of mundane as used here. To me, your use of mundane suggests the task of writing a program after high-level questions, what and why, have received high-level answers. Everything but initial brainstorming. The hypothesis introduced in the article is that pair programming is beneficial because it improves individual skills and code quality. I'm not sure how clearly that's communicated. Individual skills are improved by understanding your current problem-solving process and upgrading it as necessary. This isn't only about picking up skills by observing others, but reasoning about the steps you take and updating as appropriate. Pair programming isn't necessary for this, it just facilitates it. This whole being mindful thing deserves a post of its own. I would expect that code quality would be improved because design flaws and bugs are more likely to be caught early. Therefore there's less time spent rewriting or debugging. I'm treating this foray into pair programming as an experiment. It was literally a week ago that I began to see how pair programming could be efficient and even enjoyable. I do not plan on doing 100% pairing forever, it's impractical and probably inefficient. Right now I'm thinking that 50-75% pairing might be an optimum in most cases.