This isn't another post about why pair programming doesn't work, isn't a good idea, or any other such nonsense. I'm a true believer in pair programming. I've been sold on the concept since I first read about it in the first edition of Kent Beck's Extreme Programming late in the prior millenium. I've experienced pair programming and so I know the benefits first hand:
- It consistently produces the best code, the code I'm proudest of in my entire career. And not a little prouder of. I mean, like, an order of magnitude more proud of.
- I'm operating at about twice the velocity I would normally, which is a rush, and incidentally, means there is no negative effect on team velocity. I've actually measured this on a real project.
- I learn way more
- I enjoy my job way more
- Part of me is afraid to
I'll just go ahead and lead with this one since it's the hardest to talk about. I really like how the hashrocket guy put it: "Pairing is a burning crucible". Heat reveals impurities and exposes the true nature of things. If I'm having a self-doubting, insecure kind of day, I might not want this. Intellectually I'm totally convinced this is BS and the benefits far outweigh the minor pain of revealing what's obvious to everyone: I don't know everything. I like to think this reason is not a major factor preventing me from pairing, but in the interest of self-disclosure I'm putting it out there. - But I might not get my stuff done
This one is a bit more insidious, but like the prior reason begins with self-centered fear. If I pair on your task, I might not get mine done. And conversely if you help me you might not get yours done. There are at least two ways to address this. The first is to get over it: I believe that the software I produce will be way better if I pair. And obviously producing better software is what's best for me and whoever I work for. I have to be clear on this and act on it, which in my experience is not always easy. And of course the other members of my team do as well.
The other way to fix this is organizationally: don't assign tasks to individuals. I've been in situations where this was out of my control. Some clients like having a single "go to" person for a given feature or issue. But this doesn't have to stop pair programming if the team doesn't let it. - Inertia
This one is a little more nebulous but I don't think it's less real. Sometimes I don't pair because I don't put forth enough effort to find someone to pair with. Other times I might be "in the middle of something". Either of these fall into the same general category of inertia: an object at rest (me, by myself, in front of my computer) tends to stay at rest.
- Odd number of people on your team
This is so obvious an issue it seems silly to put down, but I've seen it make a big impact. I know the song says "One is the loneliest number" but three is also not very good. What tends to happen is pairing becomes awkward as one gal or guy is left out and sometimes leads to little or no pairing at all. I suppose you could address this by making a pair your smallest unit of staffing a project. But it's also true that even if you have 3 people on your team you could still pair 2/3 of the time if you are intentional about it. - Distributed team
Remote pair programming is a whole nother topic and I have some experience with it that perhaps I'll share in another post. Suffice to say: it's not as good as pairing in person, but better than not pairing at all. Because there are some technical details to work out and do, there is that much more barrier to overcome and it requires even more sustained effort to keep up. - They won't let me
This is supposed to be the elephant in the room: management won't let me pair program. My thinking is that this one is mostly a myth. I've worked in a lot of places, some of them quite draconian. The truth however is that pair programming can start so innocuously that it's hard to have a mandate against it. Imagine management saying: you're not allowed to help other people. Even the pointiest of pointy haired bosses would see how stupid that is. I'm sure someone will comment that "No, that really does happen". Fine. I just don't think it's all that common. Most people, in my experience, actually do want to be useful and contribute something positive. They just may (wildly) disagree about how best to do so. - They code in X and X sucks
This one requires compromise, but can be a a positive sometimes if you let it. My first ruby project I got to pair with my friend Jim, a dedicated emacs guy. As a result I had to learn emacs, something which I probably wouldn't have decided to do if I hadn't see what a productive environment it is first hand. There are other times where I pair with someone and they use something and even after trying it I still think it sucks. In that situation I try to get them to always pair on my machine. Err, I mean, switch back and forth between each others machines in the interest of fairness ;) - No one wants to pair (except me)
Alas, this has been the hardest to solve. You can be fortunate enough to work for (or start) a company that mandates pair programming. Or else you can attempt to influence people. My only advice, based on experience, is that less is more. Don't talk about pair programming at all, just offer to help people. And then ask for help when you're stuck. I've sadly tried the approach of trying to convert people to pair programming, unit testing, or any other number of quite good ideas by incessantly talking to people about them. Don't do this.
