hardcopy/productivity inverse correlation

[Dan Bernstein]

In article <46 at resumix.UUCP> resumix!stevans at decwrl.dec.com (Mark Stevans) writes:
> I invite commentary and/or anecdotes for or against the following thesis:
> 	There is, in general, an inverse correlation between the amount of
> 	source code hardcopy a programmer employs and the productivity of
> 	that programmer.

Depends. The problem with screen editing is that you can never get
enough context. When I feel like I'm in a lull in coding on screen, I'll
print the program out (usually with several other programs in the same
state, and a few completed projects for last looks) and spend a few
hours working with it away from a keyboard. I do this maybe a couple of
times every few months, and for some programs it really helps.

Sometimes I find it's rather useless. I still haven't had the urge to
print out the pty source. The original code, along with 100 megabytes
of mail and other miscellany, is archived on a tape gathering dust in my
apartment, just in case disaster ever strikes. I doubt I'll ever read
that tape or its companions. Or send any of the files to a printer.

Occasionally it's useful *not* to have copies of a new program, because
(accidentally) deleting it and starting all over is a great way to
radically improve the design and implementation. But I've found that it
doesn't require much discipline to do this even if you have copies.

So I don't see much in your statement to agree with. (Then again, maybe
I program unproductively, so maybe you're right. :-) )

---Dan