4 ms·

> I didn’t use [vim] in 2017. That’s because my employer started doing more pairing, and nobody could pair with me. It was bad enough for the Atom users, but ev

> I didn’t use [vim] in 2017. That’s because my employer started doing more pairing, and nobody could pair with me. It was bad enough for the Atom users, but even the other vimmers couldn’t pair with me. They’d press something expecting the vanilla vim action and get something completely unexpected. It’d drive them crazy. I've never done pair programming (other than one project when I was in school and it was required -- bit of a nightmare IMO), but I thought the way it typically worked was you switch off who "drives" (i.e. actually types the code) in long intervals. So why couldn't each coder just use their own preferred programming environment? Do they not each have their own machines?

modernerd 7y ago
That's how it traditionally works, but some see this as a limitation. For example, the pitch for Live Share for VS Code says: > Each of you can open files, navigate, edit code, highlight, or refactor - and changes are instantly reflected. As you edit you can see your teammate’s cursor, jump to the location of your teammate’s carat, or follow their actions. https://code.visualstudio.com/blogs/2017/11/15/live-share https://code.visualstudio.com/blogs/2017/11/15/live-share I've found that letting both participants inspect and edit code together collaboratively is useful when one participant is acting in more of a teaching role. When the student gets stuck, you can jump in and demo right in the editor instead of dictating code or ideas. It's useful if it's not overused, like the second brake on the instructor's side in a driving lesson. But if both participants are of equal ability, it just becomes annoying to have dual controls in my experience. Hell is watching other people use computers, but jumping in to effectively grab your colleague's keyboard and mouse and say, “look, I'll do it” can be irritating. The other main advantage is that, because you're streaming actions and not video, you get a high definition view at all times instead of an image that sometimes breaks up. I think the OP is possibly talking about pairing in the same physical location on the same machine, though, where custom vim setups can definitely get in the way if you're swapping driver every hour or two.

modernerd 7y ago

That's how it traditionally works, but some see this as a limitation. For example, the pitch for Live Share for VS Code says: > Each of you can open files, navigate, edit code, highlight, or refactor - and changes are instantly reflected. As you edit you can see your teammate’s cursor, jump to the location of your teammate’s carat, or follow their actions. https://code.visualstudio.com/blogs/2017/11/15/live-share https://code.visualstudio.com/blogs/2017/11/15/live-share I've found that letting both participants inspect and edit code together collaboratively is useful when one participant is acting in more of a teaching role. When the student gets stuck, you can jump in and demo right in the editor instead of dictating code or ideas. It's useful if it's not overused, like the second brake on the instructor's side in a driving lesson. But if both participants are of equal ability, it just becomes annoying to have dual controls in my experience. Hell is watching other people use computers, but jumping in to effectively grab your colleague's keyboard and mouse and say, “look, I'll do it” can be irritating. The other main advantage is that, because you're streaming actions and not video, you get a high definition view at all times instead of an image that sometimes breaks up. I think the OP is possibly talking about pairing in the same physical location on the same machine, though, where custom vim setups can definitely get in the way if you're swapping driver every hour or two.