[HN Gopher] Writing code with pencil and paper (2022)
___________________________________________________________________
Writing code with pencil and paper (2022)
Author : raytopia
Score : 133 points
Date : 2023-10-09 03:46 UTC (19 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (css-tricks.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (css-tricks.com)
| eigenhombre wrote:
| Am surprised by all the negative comments about writing code by
| hand. Many of the comments here speak about moving or thinking
| faster, but where I have always found pen and paper most helpful
| is when I've needed to slow down, focus, feel out edge cases, and
| give my intuition and experience more chances to engage with the
| problem. Occasionally for purely algorithmic things I've written
| out an entire function or loop, but more often it's a table of
| the program state during an iteration, or a diagram of how two
| things talk to each other, or what calls what in what order...
| just the little bits I need to think about, get clear on, before
| I go back to my editor for the next steps to address the problem.
| If you've ever driven a manual transmission, it feels a little
| like downshifting to get extra power on a steep hill climb.
|
| It has been suggested ([1],[2]) that writing by hand helps with
| memory retention and probably other aspects of cognition; in my
| case, it may just be that writing [edit: by hand] "feels calmer,"
| so, if I have a hard problem to think through, the pen usually
| comes out.
|
| [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33815075/
|
| [2]
| https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/095679761452458...
| cssanchez wrote:
| I'm the same way. Different strokes for different folks, I
| suppose.
|
| I need to write down my thoughts for everything on paper,
| sticky notes or drawing boards if I want to be sure that Ive
| thought about it well enough. I find most people don't have
| this immediate drive for quality, though. Most developers just
| want to splash words on the keyboard and see an initial result
| to see if it works. I work the opposite way, I need to see it
| work in my mind or on paper before coding it. But neither of us
| is right or wrong, we just work differently.
| trealira wrote:
| Often when I can't think of a solution, and my attempts have
| failed, I inadvertently stop paying attention and just start
| messing around with words on the screen in the IDE. Pen and
| paper helps me focus on the problem.
|
| Also, when thinking of a solution, and I'm starting to form an
| idea in my head, typing it into an IDE can make me lose focus
| unless the idea is already very clearly outlined in my head.
| It's happened to me before that while I have a partially formed
| idea in my mind, I type it into the IDE, and a large window of
| completion suggestions, or a red underline from a typo,
| distract me and I forget the idea I was thinking about, and I
| have to start over.
|
| I was diagnosed with ADD; it could be I'm just more easily
| distracted than other programmers.
|
| And yeah, I draw tables, write pseudo code, draw outlines of
| the program, sketch data structures, etc.
| [deleted]
| WalterBright wrote:
| During Christmas vacation while in college, I didn't have access
| to a computer. So I'd fill spiral notebooks with code.
|
| Even in college, the computer was in the computer center. So in
| the dorm I'd still code in spiral notebooks, listening to ELP and
| Jethro Tull.
|
| I kinda miss that a teensy bit.
| arethuza wrote:
| I remember one Easter break (1987) spending a couple of weeks
| at my parents working through lambda calculus examples by hand
| - which was extremely laborious and used lots of paper but
| actually got me to really like the topic.
| KingOfCoders wrote:
| A friend of mine, in the 80s, wrote machine code on paper
| (calculating offsets in his head) having memorized all op codes,
| and drawing the graphics for a game for a Sharp MZ-800.
|
| I always admired his patience and skills, me using an assembler
| on an Amstrad to write my games.
| CSMastermind wrote:
| In mentoring engineers I've found that some are doing what
| amounts to advanced pattern matching. They memorize the syntax
| for a for loop but never really internalize what it does (they
| just seem to know write these letters if you want things to
| repeat). Not dissimilar to what I suspect LLMs are doing when
| they generate code.
|
| By contrast when I write code I see in my minds eye what the code
| should do, tinker with it, formulate an algorithm, and only then
| do I try to translate what's in my head into syntax.
|
| When asked how people can learn this skill (or get better at
| algorithms in general) I always say they should practice writing
| code by hand.
| ignite2 wrote:
| I've seen the same tutoring math. It's tough to get through, as
| it's a learning style that got them this far. Of course, not
| they are needing tutoring, so it's stopped working.
|
| How does writing code by hand fix this? They can still write
| the same things from the same understandings. I've had some
| luck having people explain things to me, without looking at the
| code/math.
| CSMastermind wrote:
| The value is in getting them to write down what happens step
| by step as their program executes.
|
| Writing things by hand can just help facilitate that because
| it removes the ability to run the program and get the final
| result.
|
| People can lean on their tools to 'guess and check' their
| work. Write a loop, run the program, and get an out of bounds
| error. They'll have learned oh this error means I need to
| subtract one from my loop bounds. And sometimes that works,
| though many times, it means there's an edge case they didn't
| properly handle.
|
| When you only have pencil and paper and you need to explain
| to me what your code does you have to write down a
| representation of what's in memory and then how it changes
| step by step as the code runs.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| I would be way too impatient to write code like this. It is
| hard for me to imagine how anyone could do this. I guess I
| do not really get this, it almost feels to me like people
| want to be hipsterish a bit. But of course I am likely
| wrong.
| [deleted]
| lysecret wrote:
| I can relate to this. IMO in the title there is a WHEN. Missing.
| If you are using pencil and paper every time (even for the 100th
| little API variation) you are doing too much planning haha
| _glass wrote:
| I think it is crucial to learn how to code with pen and paper.
| All computerization adds a mental burden, that shouldn't be
| there. Also this is a nice way to connect computer science with
| mathematics.
| alpaca128 wrote:
| > All computerization adds a mental burden
|
| Even if it did, having to write down thoughts or code by hand
| at slow speed and without convenient way to modify it is
| significantly worse. Not to mention I'd constantly get
| distracted by my ugly handwriting.
|
| If you prefer doing it the oldschool way that's fine, but don't
| force it on others assuming their brains work the same.
| maipen wrote:
| I disagree. All code is useless without computers. We should
| use every single tool that can boost our efficiency and allow
| us to make less errors. Copilot, autocomplete, intelisense,
| etc... It's a waste of your time and you will write worse code
| if you just use pen and paper. Guaranteed.
| absrec wrote:
| Agreed. The faster you implement and correct the better it
| becomes. It's quite improbable that you'll catch a logical
| error in writing and not catch it while coding it up. It's
| also quite unlikely that a sketch of your plan will help you
| more than a debugger will.
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| I disagree, if you get into this habit, you risk missing
| the forest for the trees, which is much more dangerous :
| for instance that you should have used a different
| programming paradigm, a different programming language, a
| completely different approach at solving the problem than
| coding that, or even sometimes solving that problem might
| be an actual waste of effort, better spent elsewhere !
| absrec wrote:
| Design, tooling, relevance != implementation.
|
| And not saying don't think just pointing out that careful
| handcrafted logic takes almost the same time to implement
| anyway.
|
| Most problems are such that it's hard to know what really
| needs to be accounted for initially due to some janky
| interface or the language not behaving as you expected
| which can nuke the whole plan.
|
| Writing stuff down can make you more confident about the
| approach and ironically lead to a dead end because you
| assumed everything was accounted for.
| gitgud wrote:
| I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not, you have the word
| "pen" in your name!
|
| Anyway, not sure if it's "guaranteed" to be worse than using
| a computer. Yes, you'll definitely get less help with pen and
| paper. But you'll probably end up understanding the problem
| better, without relying on GPT completion of code etc...
| a_c wrote:
| I think better in pen and paper somehow. I don't know why.
| Whenever I need some serious thinking and designing, I reach out
| to paper and pen. My brain just wire differently on keyboard. I'm
| surprised to learn many feel differently
| marcyb5st wrote:
| Throwback to my Functional Programming course during Uni years.
| Writing OCaml code on paper wasn't fun. I think it helped to
| cement some concepts, but the extent of said help it's not clear
| to me. In fact, I also believe the same could have been achieved
| using a text editor.
| renegade-otter wrote:
| It IS useful - for interviews. I have a whiteboard at home just
| for that. It's amazing how stressful it is to write code by hand
| _without_ someone breathing down your neck.
|
| Outside of that - life is short, and this is waste of it.
| shmde wrote:
| I got blacklisted from an MNC in India because I was writing up
| the logic for the algorithm problem on paper and the camera
| flagged me as cheating on the coding test. Its weird cause since
| childhood we were forced to use pen and paper to solve
| math/physics/chemistry problems and now you get flagged on online
| tests for using it. I just cannot do the "thinking" part of the
| code with my keyboard and IDE.
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| If you have cameras on tests auto-flagging you, then you have
| _much_ worse problems to deal with anyway...
| sgjohnson wrote:
| > If you're unsure, think about the last job interview you did,
| and remember how there was no computer around in the interview
| room -- just your interviewers, a blank sheet of paper, and a
| blue ball-point pen.
|
| I haven't done this a single time in my life and I've interviewed
| for no less than 25 positions.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| My first code was done with a graph paper notebook, and a pencil.
|
| It was Machine Code.
| Madmallard wrote:
| I grew up drawing a lot and doing a lot of stuff on paper for
| thinking so it's natural for me to solve harder/more complex
| programming problems on paper before writing up the code. It
| helps me wrap my head around it.
| tomohawk wrote:
| The expressivity of pencil and paper are so much better than data
| input on a computer. It's great for creative thinking. Between
| humans, it's so much faster than anything that is intermediated
| by screens.
|
| The main benefit is getting things generally straight in your
| head before committing to data entry into a tool or coding.
|
| It's a false saving to spend days / weeks at a computer to save a
| few hours of design time.
| totetsu wrote:
| Its amazing how useful it is to slow down and just write out some
| problem with pen(cil) and paper. This has help me get unstuck
| form some bad habits after year of speeding past them.
| ourmandave wrote:
| This is why I keep a dry-erase in the shower next to the soap-on-
| a-rope.
|
| I can use the tub surround as a white board for my "ah-ha!"
| shower moments.
| kbelder wrote:
| You're probably joking, I don't know, but I am now thinking
| about doing this.
| FFP999 wrote:
| [dead]
| Almondsetat wrote:
| He doesn't seem to use pen and paper to actually write the code,
| more to design the algorithm and logic he wants to achieve
| instead.
| xnorswap wrote:
| I couldn't disagree more.
|
| If you're finding yourself reaching for pen and paper to write
| actual code, then your tooling sucks.
|
| Your IDE isn't suitable for prototyping, or something else is
| going wrong.
|
| I'm not suggesting that nothing in the planning phase should be
| white-boarded, but pen is the wrong medium for code.
|
| You should have a tool where you can fire up your tooling and be
| writing the same thing you would write on paper, but with
| autocompletion, error feedback and browsable interactive output.
|
| In my experience that's far more appropriate an environment for
| rapidly getting something down and working through the problem.
|
| By all means, start with pen and paper to get a feel for the
| problem domain, but that process should stop short of actual
| code, and this article doesn't really sell me on the benefits.
|
| I'd rather test my assumptions in something like LinqPad, where
| I'll get real feedback not just a "feeling" about what I've
| written.
| gilcot wrote:
| It's like you and many people didn't read and understand the
| post.
|
| > but pen is the wrong medium for code.
|
| Pen & Paper is really excellent for many people, maybe not you
| but it's fine some others. You may use an electronic device
| (some people are using Remarkable and alikes) or chalk and
| black board, or MindMapping app; the key idea is to first
| forethink and analyse the problem before diving into coding.
|
| > your tooling and be writing the same thing you would write on
| paper, but with autocompletion, error feedback and browsable
| interactive output.
|
| What kind of tooling do you use for pseudo-code (not a real
| language, but textual informal prose) with that features?
| taeric wrote:
| Oddly, for me the feedback of the computer is too fast for
| thinking. I like being able to write a bit before thinking
| about some details.
|
| More, I find that forcing myself to run the code in my head is
| a good idea.
|
| That all said, I don't do the paper thing often. Really only
| when thinking at a level other than the symbolic of text. Some
| system diagrams. Sometimes numeric. I suspect if I got good at
| Mathematica, I'd do more numeric thinking there.
| jroseattle wrote:
| This makes sense to me if the problem I'm solving simply
| devolves to code and I want as short a path as possible to
| completing it. I really don't see that much anymore, other than
| basic bug fixes.
|
| Not every problem I'm solving is just a hunt for the code
| implementation. I like to reason about solutions beyond the
| syntax. I use pen and paper a lot, including for code, and I'll
| use shorthand to represent longer-form code blocks. I find that
| approach better because I can hide the noise that code blocks
| can introduce in an IDE. I want code to support my solution --
| not a solution to fit into code. IDEs and frameworks can have
| that affect on people, in my experience.
|
| As with this comment and the one preceding it, your mileage may
| vary.
| spookie wrote:
| Honestly, if anything I'm trying to do is sufficiently complex,
| I reach for pen and paper and use drawings, abstract ideas to
| have a better idea of what I'm going to code.
|
| Actually, this way you catch a lot of poor design decisions
| that you would otherwise fall into. If starting out with code,
| I might attempt to "fix" poor design through hacks due to the
| "sunk time fallacy" of code already written, that kinda works,
| but isn't maintainable.
|
| Honestly, no "tool" on a computer would let me print my
| imagination as easily as pen and paper. Perhaps a drawing
| tablet, but that's an additional thing I would need to plug
| into my PC.
| [deleted]
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| You haven't mentioned pseudocode ?
| pc86 wrote:
| Pseudocode isn't coding, but sufficiently advanced pseudocode
| is indistinguishable from Python.
|
| Regardless, I don't see why the parent would have necessarily
| mentioned pseudocode for any reason?
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| Because that's a huge part of what the article talks about
| ?
|
| (Also, even Python is at more risk of funneling you in some
| direction that might be suboptimal, at least more than
| pseudocode.)
| HumblyTossed wrote:
| > If you're finding yourself reaching for pen and paper to
| write actual code, then your tooling sucks.
|
| Oh bull. At the level of thinking where you'd pull out pen and
| paper, ALL digital tooling sucks. Not one single solitary tool
| can beat pen and paper at that level. Not one.
| xnorswap wrote:
| Rather than "bull", I suspect we're already in agreement,
| given your statement, "At the level of thinking where you'd
| pull out pen and paper".
|
| We appear to agree there's a place for pen & paper, and we
| appear to agree that's a different level to coding
| implementation.
|
| Writing down code, complete with correct syntax, parentheses,
| indentation, etc, as the article wants, is not in my opinion
| that level.
|
| At that level, the tooling does not suck.
|
| So yes, I agree, "At the level" where pen & paper shines it
| should be used.
|
| That level is not writing correct code, unless you can
| convince me otherwise?
| doublerabbit wrote:
| For myself by writing prototypic code correctly with pen;
| not only does it keep my vision straight, it also gives
| myself clarity and a sense of sanity of say, what that
| function does.
|
| With the hard evidence you can then refer back to. So, when
| you are ready to expand your design you already have the
| foundation on page.
|
| It acts as a pillar to the psuedo code that comes with
| design later on. If that is the going to be foundation to
| that function, it might as well be written correctly on
| paper.
| mellosouls wrote:
| _If you 're finding yourself reaching for pen and paper to
| write actual code, then your tooling sucks._
|
| Or maybe it's horses for courses?
|
| Personally I found the idea of going beyond prototyping on
| paper _as a rule_ not for me, though there are sometimes final
| snippets reveal themselves better away from the screen when I
| 'm stuck in the mud on something.
|
| My point is though that we really ought to allow others to find
| their own way and what is best for them rather than dismissing
| it so emphatically because we don't personally get it.
| xnorswap wrote:
| You can take as read that all my posts are prefixed with "In
| my opinion". I find it unnecessary to type that out on every
| post.
|
| Taking a format that only a computer can interpret, code, and
| choosing to write it down on a medium a computer can't read,
| hand-writing, is not typically a productive exercise.
|
| Even in interviews I'd rather hand a candidate a laptop.
|
| There are more worthwhile things to hand-write, such as
| sequence diagrams, and there are more worthwhile places to
| write code, such as an IDE.
|
| If someone is finding it easier to write code on paper than
| in an IDE, I'd rather not ignore that signal and try to
| discover why their IDE is proving such an impediment.
|
| Maybe it takes 10 minutes to start up, maybe it throws up so
| many errors for each syntax mistake that it's distracting and
| hard to see the wood for the trees. Maybe it doesn't actually
| produce useful output. Maybe it doesn't have real time
| debugging and step-through.
|
| Who knows, but something is causing it to be mentally easier
| to write down the same code on paper than the IDE, and that's
| not something that should be ignored, that's something that
| should be fixed.
| codethrw wrote:
| [dead]
| Shugarl wrote:
| I personally tend to think better when I'm away from the
| computer.
|
| Coding on the IDE helps me to experiment and quickly put
| something together that works.
|
| But thinking while writing things down or while walking is
| a slower process, so it helps me focus on nothing but the
| problem obvious edge cases, different solution designs,
| etc...
|
| So by thinking about the code away from the IDE first, then
| by polishing my ideas on the IDE, I usually end up with
| higher quality code.
|
| But since it's less fun to do things that way, I just tend
| to do everything on my IDE.
| gilcot wrote:
| > If someone is finding it easier to write code on paper
| than in an IDE,
|
| The post isn't about writing code on paper, but about the
| planing and ideas collection before writing effective code.
|
| > write down the same code on paper than the IDE,
|
| No, pseudo-code and notes and flowcharts aren't the code
| (maybe the later on some visual language environment.)
| You're missing the whole point, sorry.
| mellosouls wrote:
| _You can take as read that all my posts are prefixed with
| "In my opinion". I find it unnecessary to type that out on
| every post._
|
| Its obviously a given - except where people are commenting
| in a way that indicates they are expressing _the one true
| way_ , as you did, and have done again.
|
| The OP's way is not for me, but I'm ok with it being for
| them.
|
| I agree that _if_ there is a problem in their process or
| workflow that is influencing an inferior (for them)
| approach it is better to try to help them fix it.
| Timpy wrote:
| I agree that there's not much point in writing actual literal
| semantically correct code on a piece of paper, but I don't
| think that's at all the point of the article. The author talks
| about understanding the problem space, getting their ideas
| organized, and (if I may charitably interpret the article a
| bit) even go as far as scratching out some ideas of what the
| code might look like.
| skydhash wrote:
| I don't know if it's from Calm Technology, but here something
| that i read about recently: Don't make humans act like a
| computer and don't make the computer act like a human.
|
| The first part is something I believe in this case. It's ok to
| think with pen and paper (and I do when trying to find an
| algorithm) But I stop short of implementation details, instead
| typing out code. Why? Because text editors is much more
| flexible in this particular case (live programming environment,
| REPLs, or a quick code-compile-run cycle are much more useful)
|
| And the second part is why I don't like LLMs for code
| generation. Snippets are more deterministic. I'm ok with it for
| suggestions of ideas I can explore (in books, not with the LLM)
| [deleted]
| absrec wrote:
| I'd argue it's even more valuable to learn to code without paper.
| Many of us formed habits of thinking with paper in school and
| freeze up a bit in front of the screen. I think it's better to
| work to eliminate that freezing up than to accommodate it.
| lelima wrote:
| I understand using paper for Diagrams and arquitechtual design,
| but for coding?
|
| On college I remember having to code on paper and you simply
| can't test your code for typos or small error, even if your
| logic was perfect professor give you marks for a missing ';'
|
| note: the class was evaluating the Logic / algorihtm not basic
| code syntax
| GuB-42 wrote:
| To each his own. I went the opposite route, now, I don't even
| have a pen and paper on my desk. I still carry a pen in my bag
| for signing documents and stuff, but I don't remember the last
| time I scribbled something on paper.
|
| I usually take notes or lay my thought using a text editor, I
| find it easier to edit, manipulate, and store. I occasionally use
| a graphics tablet or my phone with a stylus when I need more than
| text (ex: drawing schematics), essentially like paper, but more
| editable and I can save it as a file.
|
| But if you find that pen and paper works best for you, go for it.
| Maybe one reason I went the opposite route is that the author
| likes to think in advance before going for the implementation,
| that's a top down approach. Mine is very bottom up, I go straight
| to coding, sometime even before reading the specs. It feels like
| putting ideas into code makes me think more clearly. I can always
| scrap that code later, I often do, it is cheap when things are
| just getting started. And pen and paper is not really suitable
| for that kind of rapid prototyping.
| al_be_back wrote:
| Pencil? you can easily Ctrl-Z.
|
| nah, wanna go old-school, use inkwell pen, or better still
| feather + ink for hard-core hackers! focuses the mind, you've
| gotta know your grammar, syntax etcetera. non of that
| autocomplete sorcery for me
| intrasight wrote:
| I "write"code in my head. On walks/runs. In the shower. At the
| gym. Mostly at the keyboard but for hard problems, I benefit from
| stepping away from it.
| faeriechangling wrote:
| I only use pen and paper for sketching diagrams and graphical
| relationships between things. This is probably the main use for
| paper & whiteboards - they are MUCH cheaper than their digital
| equivalents for drawing regardless of size.
|
| Writing out pseudocode on paper is... okay... although not my
| preference. It's okay if you get stuck and want a context switch.
|
| Writing out syntactically correct code, including commands like
| "sudo" on paper on the other hand is an enormous waste of one's
| own time. God help this man if he ever takes up Java programming.
| Just type actual computer code like this on computers so you can
| run it and see if it works. Then if it doesn't you can just use
| backspace instead of an eraser.
| zubairq wrote:
| I mostly work with a whiteboard and then photo and print out the
| board, and work from the paper to see if I can then make further
| refinements by writing on the board again, and so on and so on,
| until I feel like I understand the problem/solution and then get
| started working on the computer to code.
| beached_whale wrote:
| When I was learning to code, I didn't have a computer of my own.
| So I wrote the code out on paper. This worked because
| fundamentally, it's a way to communicate ideas in a way that is
| generally unambiguous and precise. It's rare these days, but
| something like the act of moving a pencil/pen over the hand
| written code and working through the state can be helpful at
| times too.
| rimliu wrote:
| Same. I could only access computer at university, so I wrote
| programs at home and then just typed them in when I got access.
| kbelder wrote:
| Me too. I would write out a basic program on lined paper at
| school, and then when I visited my brother I would type it in
| to his Ohio Scientific Challenger 2p:
|
| https://www.vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=372
|
| I remember the moment it clicked that "if statements..
| strings... I can make a text adventure!"
|
| It feels like that experience helped me develop, but on the
| other hand, don't we all think that about most of the hardships
| we experienced when young? It's hard to know for sure.
| jappgar wrote:
| But then i can't use copilot
| Phenix88be wrote:
| Last time someone try to interview me with a pen and paper, I
| walk the door laughing... It shows how little they know about the
| job, major red flag!
| ekanes wrote:
| I'm not much of a programmer but also find this much better for
| my _thinking_ process. I 'm much more creative and likely to
| think bigger-picture.
| blueveia wrote:
| Agree it has its usefulness.
|
| Job interviews with pen and paper are hardly a selling point for
| me, I had one 10years ago and still dreaded it. My 2 cents are,
| if a company hires you to work on a computer in X environment
| then that's what they should test you on - or as close to it as
| they can.
| _AzMoo wrote:
| So while I'm not going to disagree that writing with pen and
| paper can be a valuable exercise, the assertion that it's
| inevitable is utterly false. I am far more effective in sketching
| out my code design in an IDE than I am on paper, and never in my
| professional career of 23 years have I had to write out code in
| pen and paper for a job interview, or even in the job.
| jgrahamc wrote:
| I mean people are free to do that but the last time I had to was
| in 1985 and that's because I was programming a KIM-1 by typing in
| hex codes through the keypad and I didn't have any sort of
| terminal.
|
| https://blog.jgc.org/2013/04/how-i-coded-in-1985.html
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| I did the same in 1979 on an Acorn System One. Couldn't afford
| colour pens though so didn't have syntax highlighting like you
| did.
| absoluteunit1 wrote:
| "If the thought of handwriting code seems silly, it might
| surprise you to know that it's inevitable"
|
| It doesn't seem silly but saying it's inevitable does seem
| silly...
|
| I do not remember the last time I or someone else has had an in-
| person interview; saying impossible would have been more accurate
| than saying inevitable
|
| However, I do see this being possible and beneficial for students
| who are at the whims of the professor and if the professor
| prefers the old-fashioned approach; you will end up writing some
| logic by hand
| ZoomZoomZoom wrote:
| Any discussion of handwritten code is incomplete without
| mentioning Edsger Dijkstra's approach, demonstrated in this
| beautiful interview: https://youtu.be/mLEOZO1GwVc?t=246
|
| I'm surprised no one has mentioned it here yet.
| squarepizza wrote:
| What a great watch, thanks for sharing. I liked his metaphor of
| music and transcription to programming. Writing of music is not
| the main function of a musician in the way that writing
| programs is not main function of a programmer.
| mcluck wrote:
| > If you're unsure, think about the last job interview you did,
| and remember how there was no computer around in the interview
| room -- just your interviewers, a blank sheet of paper, and a
| blue ball-point pen.
|
| I haven't had an interview like this in about 10 years
| sweezyjeezy wrote:
| 5 years for me, but yeah live coding is always done on a screen
| these days. I mean
|
| - whiteboard / paper is just so slow
|
| - extremely poor editing functionality on whiteboard / paper
|
| - some people's handwriting is not legible
| Lacusch wrote:
| Yeah, I struggle to read my own handwriting sometimes. If an
| interviewer would require len and paper it would be ...
| interesting.
| sanitycheck wrote:
| I'm trying to think... I've had about 30 contracts and a lot
| more interviews than that.
|
| The only one I remember that involved a sheet of paper was 20
| printed pages of code which I had to find the bugs in. And that
| was actually quite a fun exercise. (I did apparently find more
| bugs than most, I also subsequently found some bugs in their
| contract and NDA.)
| xnorswap wrote:
| I had one a few weeks back like this.
|
| It was a strong signal I didn't want to work there.
|
| There were even stronger signals that followed. It was by far
| my worst interview ever, I haven't really gotten over it yet.
|
| It even caused me to sign up to glassdoor just so I could leave
| a negative review.
| sanitycheck wrote:
| Had a couple like that, the relief from not ever having to
| work with those people lasted longer than the trauma from the
| interview. Look on the bright side, at least you didn't get
| the job!
| whateveracct wrote:
| I write Haskell on paper all the time! Especially very type-
| oriented stuff. When you get that all looking good, usually the
| actual implementation is trivial. You just black out and build it
| without thinking. Because the design was so provably good on
| paper in types.
| proc0 wrote:
| I can see this for Haskell. It probably ends up looking like a
| math exercise problem.
| nilslindemann wrote:
| I upvoted the "I couldn't disagree more"-post, but now I regret
| it (edit: oh, there's an "unvote" button). One can do a lot more
| with a pencil and a piece of paper than with a blank text entry.
| Drawing figures, arrows, etc. There is even undo, thanks to
| rubbers. But it sucks that one can not insert lines in between.
| taeric wrote:
| The new writing tablets are good at this. Circle the text to
| move it. If you have a Wacom on your computer, very similar.
| nilslindemann wrote:
| I recently saw Theo using https://excalidraw.com/ in one of
| his YouTube videos. I like that one.
| taeric wrote:
| Yeah, I meant stuff like the Remarkable. I have a Kindle
| Scribe. Amusingly, the scribe was not good at this at
| launch, but has gotten some good updates. My understanding
| is the Remarkable is head and shoulders better.
| nilslindemann wrote:
| Sure, If you have bought something like this already, it
| can do you a good service.
| taeric wrote:
| Certainly, I wouldn't go buy one if you didn't want it
| already. I did the kindle as I was happy to have a large
| screen kindle. :D
|
| The problem I have with a ton of computer based sketching
| tools, is that I just don't sketch with a mouse that
| well. And doing it with the keyboard is ridiculously
| difficult for me. The Wacom can mostly work, but it takes
| a ton of getting used to having the pen detached from
| what you are drawing. Easier than the mouse, but still
| hard.
| nilslindemann wrote:
| > that one can not insert lines in between
|
| Ok, not easily.
| zebedayo wrote:
| [dead]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-10-09 23:01 UTC)