[darkchasma]

This is a little silly. As a developer, I love cutting code. I really don't care if I'm pair programming or not. I don't like to write tests nearly as much. If you swap in "write unit tests" in place of "pair programming", the article pretty much works the same, the one difference is the authors social anxiety.

So really, this isn't about pair programming, it's about the fact the the poster has social anxiety, and needs to address that. (And I need to stop posting on HN and write some tests).

[JoeAltmaier]

You're projecting. I completely understand the OPs position; I concur 100%. You can dismiss it as some foolish antisocial whine if you like; or you could understand that his position is entirely valid.

If you've never gotten into the zone; if you've never spent an entire afternoon and missed meals and been utterly surprised at the clock when you come up for air; if you've never been productive at the level of a seriously skilled programmer, then I suppose you would dismiss this as a silly rant. But that says more about you than the OP.

[couchand]

If you've never gotten into the zone WITH a pair you're really missing out. It's a far more incredible experience than doing it yourself, just like many things... ;-)

[memracom]

Would it be pair programming if two people sit together and one writes the unit tests while the other one implements the code to make it pass? Red person and Green person?

I guess during the refactor stage you would have some sort of design discussion as well. And it might be useful for one person to be the DRY promoter while the other person promotes the YAGNI point of view, or else refactoring can get out of control.

[darkchasma]

I don't know, but don't think so, that's the same difference between asynchronous and concurrent.

[informatimago]

Tests are code. Writing tests is cutting code!

(And did you think about testing your tests?)