Post Peer Programming Perspective

05 Jun 2020

Reduced Physical Contact, Increased Virtual Contact

The current world events severely reduces the amount of physical contact people have with each other. If physical contact is prohibited or reduced, the alternative of virtual contact is brought forth (more). Although it has been long used before the current world events, it proves to be indespensible in a time where physical contact is reduced. Working on the same task with a peer, we primarily utilized Zoom to communicate and concurrently work with each other. I have a desktop and a laptop. This enabled me to view the screenshare of my partner Arslan’s monitor on my desktop while simulataneously working on my own tasks on my laptop.

The Virtual Peer Work Experience

We essentially used Zoom exclusively for all three of our peer meetings. On the first day of working real-time in pairs, the most notable advantage is the ability to bring people who are behind up to speed quickly. Arslan was dealing with a move that took a couple of days, inhibiting him from making much progress on the assigned task. Both of us are using Windows 10 Home. Since Docker is intended for Unix and Linux systems, we are using the Windows Subsystem for Linux. As a result, we frequently run into issues which usually require us to reconfigure something or figure out a method of bypass. While he was moving, I spend a good amount of time going through the task and figuring solutions to various issues. During our first peer work session, I was able to assist Arlsan on some issues that I’ve encountered, effectively saving him the time he would’ve spent solving those same issues. He later ran into a problem that I did not encounter, where his docker commands suddenly failed to go through. After some reconfiguration of some files, he named to resolve that issue. The next few meetings for peer work were eventful, though nothing that I did not expect occured. We were able to assist each other in issues that we encountered and eventually find a solution or bypass. One thing I did find quite frustrating is inability to physically point at something. When there is an issue, problem, or something interesting that I spot on his sccreen, I have to describe where it is and Arslan has to spend a bit of time searching for what I am referring to. It is much easier to point out what I am talking about in person, but we tried to make the most of what we had.

Floobits Issue

Floobits is a cross-editor that allows real-time collaboration. Unfortunately, we were unable to test out Floorbits. During installation of this plugin for the IntelliJ IDEA IDE, I ran an issue that prevented me from using it. I received a notice that the server’s certificate is not trusted. As of right now, I could not find a way to resolve or bypass this issue. However, this does not discourage me from trying other cross-editors in the future. I do not doubt that a cross-editor would be essential to accelerating and streamlining the peer programming process.

Concluding Thoughts

Our peer work sessions, which were around 30 minutes each, proved to be effective in working out certain issues. I fairly enjoyed the process we had going. We initially worked on our own and save problems we could not solve on our own for the peer meeting. During the peer meeting, if Arslan so happens to have already found the solution for it, he can bring me up to speed. The same goes for the other way around, vice versa. If we both have the same issue, finding a solution is usually quicker when we both try to resolve it. Thus, to make the most of these short peer work sessions, it is advisable to work on it by yourself at first and bring certain issues you could not solve to your peer(s) later. Doing everything as a peer is too large of a time commitment. I look forward to trying a cross-editor in the future to experience how that would operate.