|
Daniel Turini wrote:
And this means there'll be more free code for new tasks, so the code throughput would be bigger.
Unit testing also involves a lot of repetitive typing, and a fast typer can also achieve better code throughput.
Whoah, you are making a big assumption, that all coders do unit tests and write documentation!  
Sometimes I feel like I'm a USB printer in a parallel universe.
|
|
|
|
|
To a point, at least.
Consider - you have ideas, you need those ideas to be entered via keyboard. The speed at which you are able to accomplish this then, is that at which you are able to 1) create a textual representation of your ideas, and 2) enter this representation via the keyboard. As long as #2 is slower than #1, your typing speed is a hindrance. In addition, if you are less-than-adept at keyboarding, it can become a distraction for you, further hurting your performance.
The bees will find their honey;
The sweetest every time...
|
|
|
|
|
I got 29 wpm, but I think that typing C++ code would be faster ..... because only 47 keywords. 
I usually use the "CompleteWord" of VisualC++, I don't think typing speed quite matter.
Maxwell Chen
|
|
|
|
|
in my opinion anyway. As long as you can let the code flow without having to stop and hunt for keys, you're doing alright. I know when I'm coding, the last thing I need are obstacles to impede my train of thought, not that my co-workers don't serve that purpose perfectly!
|
|
|
|
|
On the test, but I have to look at the keyboard while I am typing. 
I originally tried to learn touch typing on a PC at uni. It had a typing tutor program which when it got to a certain level required you to press a certain key, which was not present on the PC! Needless to say all it would do was say, "Worng, press the x key!" (or whatever key it was).
Really annoying, should have been able to step over that, bad software design. 
Roger Allen - Sonork 100.10016
Strong Sad:
Clever I am? Next to no one.
Undiscovered and soggy.
Look up. Look down. They're around.
Probably laughing. Still, bright, watery.
Listed among the top. Ten.
Nine. Late night. Early morn.
Early mourn. Now I sleep.
|
|
|
|
|
I averaged > 50wpm, but the examples given on the testing site aren't representative of the kind of English I normally type. I think they need to work on the fact that I occasionally screw up at the end of a word, and go back and correct it almost automatically. A couple of times I tried that and it wouldn't let me, which isn't exactly realistic. Still, it sounds about right, so I shouldn't complain too much. I guess I have become used to this split-style ergonomic keyboard after all 
Steve S
|
|
|
|
|
Steve S wrote:
I occasionally screw up at the end of a word, and go back and correct it
Yeah, I didn't like that part of it either. Once you had spaced away from a word, you couldn't go back and correct it.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
i didn't see the examples as much of a problem, though i did notice that my times were slightly better on "Strategic Alliances" than with "Huckleberry Finn" (71 vs. 68 WPM). The inability to correct past the current word was annoying, but then again you generally aren't supposed to be spending time on corrections during a timed test. What really bugged me was the way they marked the current word: you see, they underlined it. And this makes it harder to see commas and periods, and especially to notice the difference between them. 
The bees will find their honey;
The sweetest every time...
|
|
|
|
|
Just did the test at the site mentioned in the survey question. 76WPM @ 96% accuracy. Not bad though I think I could do better with a few more cups of coffee inside me
>
|
|
|
|
|
I don't touch type, at least not classically. My hands are almost constantly moving, rather than resting on the so-called 'home row'. Sometimes I use my left hand to type characters such as H and J and the right to cover D and F on occasions. This isn't deliberate - it's simply how I've learned to type. I've typed almost all of this post without looking at the keyboard (actually, for some of it I was staring into space, not looking at the screen or the keyboard). And I tend to type my own emphasis directly with < and > characters.
What this does mean is that I'm usually able to alternate hands rather than using the same finger to hit two different keys.
It does end up being some form of two steps forward, one back, because I do make a lot of mistakes. Not important on computers, because you simply erase the errors - there's no permanent record of the error. Oddly, I seem to know when I've made a mistake before I actually read back what I just wrote - my hand moves immediately to Backspace and hits it. I wonder whether I've learned to type some words by mistyping and correcting them?
Having said that, in programming the think time (what am I going to type?) far outweighs the time taken to actually type the text. Indeed, the same is true for anyone who's not a copyist. Therefore, overall typing speed isn't really an issue. The important thing is to be able to get your thoughts down on screen before you forget what it was you wanted to type.
Type a few words, spend a little time grasping for the next one, then continue.
Part of this could be because I learned to type on an old rubber-key Spectrum, which required quite a bit of pressure to correctly register a keypress.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, not bad for someone who never took a typing course
Sonork 100.11743 Chicken Little
"You're obviously a superstar." - Christian Graus about me - 12 Feb '03
Within you lies the power for good - Use it!
|
|
|
|
|
Not bad. I never took one either, but after 20+ years of using a keyboard, I can spook fellow-developers out by looking straight at them while I carry on typing for at least another sentence. It's even more impressive when they read what I've typed and can't find any errors in it (the English, not the code )
Steve S
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
