On 3/08/19 10:34 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:30 AM DL Neil <pythonl...@danceswithmice.info> wrote:
On 3/08/19 8:44 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
Google Hangouts, or a proprietary internal platform ("Owl") which does
similar things but is better able to handle different bandwidth
connections.
Thanks. Will add to the mix...
I have used VNC-type software to slave screens, either in pairs
(tutorial - mine following a trainee's work) or in a 'class set' (using
my screen as a 'projector'). It seemed both finicky and fragile and
whilst working well on-the-LAN (ie in-class), was too slow and 'block-y'
updating the screens when we used it for remote tutorials. (of course
such [also] reveals that we didn't have very high-speed connections)
Yeah, that would be basically what I'm talking about. It works fairly
well with a trainer/trainee model, as the trainer wants to be "hands
off" most of the time anyway (better to talk the trainee through doing
it than to grab the keyboard and do it yourself), and the "projector"
model you describe is definitely that style.
Yes. I would prefer something with a more collaborative mode - helpful
rather than 'taking (over) the lead'...
master's own text selection). Having everyone able to edit
simultaneously creates technological problems, and then a social
One of the encouraging features of many options (on list in earlier
post) is the facility of "multiple cursors".
At first this confused me, because many text editors allow one to
declare "multiple cursors" in order to perform the same action at
multiple locations throughout the same source-file. In the
pair-programming context, "multiple cursors" means exactly what you say:
each contributor is able to work (relatively) independently of the
other, and the system keeps track of who-is-doing-what! ("IDE-independent"?)
That would NOT be IDE-independent, as it requires help from the
software itself (what I'm talking about is the way screenshare can
jump across to your browser, a running app, etc, etc, and it's exactly
the same as being inside the IDE).
Agreed - and just because two could work 'independently'...
(a) certainly doesn't make it a 'good idea'! and
(b) doesn't strike me as "pair programming", particularly not in the
context of a PUG meeting - as you say...
Multiple cursors is exactly what I meant when I referred to the
technical problem and the social problem. The technical problem
(there's only one ipt and every keystroke affects that point) can be
solved with multiple cursors, but you're still left with the social
problem (one person changes something up here, another changes
something down there, and your changes affect each other - or, one is
editing what another person tries to indent). So I'm actually quite
happy with a blanket solution to the social problem by saying "only
one person can edit at a time" - and forcing people to
commit/push/pull to transfer the code to a new driver - and using that
to avoid needing to go to the technical effort of multiple ipts.
Which is why I assumed the need for Zoom or similar audio connection
(A/V 'on top' likely to overwhelm a wi-fi link)? None seem to offer
that, however some do provide a "chat" window.
Yes, some sort of audio link is HUGELY helpful, even if you do have
multiple cursors. You can synchronize over it ("Okay, lemme try
something") and just bounce ideas back and forth. If your software is
replicating the display, you don't need video, and an audio connection
is way lower bandwidth (also, a little latency can be handled - it's
no big deal if you have 100ms or 250ms lag on the audio if you have
snappy text updates).
Thanks for this assessment.
Yes, the "semaphore" is going to be my biggest concern on the night.
When done in-person, a lot can be communicated non-verbally (and,
perhaps particularly in this country: rather informally, eg even a nudge
of the elbow = 'move out of the way and let me in/I got this').
"Move, I have a kit" is occasionally effective even when said by your
opponents... or maybe that's exclusive to Counter-Strike... anyhow.
Sorry, not a gamer. However, during 'the real thing' I wouldn't have
dared to say such a thing to my buddy! (mind you, he was the unit's
armorer) Most of the time they pushed me down/towards the back. One of
the advantages of carrying the radios! (needed to tell the airedales
where to direct their fire, and which RDV we're using - please, please,
please come to take us home... Forget games, try music: "I wanna go
home" or "I want to get out of this place"!)
Although as "nav" I did get to say "move out". Close enough?
I'm thinking that such will require a greater degree of formality and
courtesy. Radio operators are used to the discipline of letting the
other person finish talking...
Right. Works quite well IME.
Basically, what I'd be interested in seeing is a multi-player game of
Notepad++, in contrast to IRC. http://www.bash.org/?85514
With the ability to frag your pair-programmer when (s)he makes a
mistake? Remind me never to 'pair' with you!
I'll see what I can find...
--
Regards =dn
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
