Open eyes Working brain » programming

How I did It: Touch Typist in five months

federico — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:22:52 +0000

Until, from the midst of this darkness, a sudden light broke in upon me, a light so brilliant and wonderous, and yet so simple. Deep practice, eradicate errors and deep practice again. I alone succeeded in discovering the secret of bestowing skill. Nay, even more, I myself became capable of bestowing mastery upon apprentice matter.

It could work.

At the end of august 2009, while i was reading about the importance for a programmer to touch type, i found out many programmers could type at 80 wpm and above. I tried myself and consistently scored 60 wpm or below. I have been spending many hours a day at the keyboard since at least 1996. How could it be i am not as fast? I already knew about the importance of practice, but i did practice for years, didn’t I? Well, uhm, no.

Think of the career of a professional football (soccer) player. How does he get there, does he play all the time for years? Actually, he spends most of the week training: stretching, pushups, sprints, weights, long runs, ball work, etc… Only a small percentage of time is indeed to play short games and the main game on sunday. That’s because play alone can only push your performance to the upper end of the range set by current skill. It’s not going to push you to the next level, to the next order of magnitude, and it doesn’t keep you from developing bad habits. And that’s where i got, very fast at typing in my very flawed 7-fingers posture. Not able to improve any further, not even in more than 10 years.

I really wanted to get better, so the questions were How? and How long will it take? I didn’t know the answer to the latter but the former was by then clear in my mind. Find a keyboard dojo, do keyboard katas and take the needed time. After trying a lot of viable solutions i found my dojo at www.typingweb.com. To add some salt to the challenge i switched keyboard layout from italian to U.S., which is quite better for programming, and i started practicing daily with their courses, routinely taking tests to record my progress. Two pomodoros a day for the first two months, then one, then again two when i was reaching the end. Always striving to get 97% or above accuracy at the higher possible speed for every single lesson.

Now, five months and about 120 pomodoros of deep practice later, i am writing this to shout to the world that IT COULD WORK. Next i’ll be moving to vim katas, while still having some fun at www.typeracer.com, because you never really stop to practice right?!

Yours sincerely,
ten fingers typist
american layout
80 wpm average
up to 100 wpm under a good moon
Federico.

Javascript Performance: Make the Browser Happy (and You Sad)

federico — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:40:11 +0000

The browser is emerging as the best platform for applications, so a large community is growing to address its final weakness: speed. Google, Yahoo and various independent programmers are all pushing a bunch of clever techniques to boost performance and please end users. That’s nice, yet as Mark Twain once said, half of the results of good intentions are evil and i see potential danger in many of the suggestions made. Here a representative short list of them:

Avoid for-in and forEach in favor of optimized while loops
Before making modifications to a DOM node remove it and then re-insert it
To insert multiple DOM nodes, first insert them into a Document Fragment and then add it to the DOM
Join all scripts into a single file
Load javascript files on demand

Let’s make it clear for once, execution speed is not a human problem, that’s what computers are for, they execute our commands fast. The human problem is programming speed and writing down clear, readable, maintainable commands aka programs. forEach loops make sense to me, they say “i want to do something on each item”, optimized while loops make sense to computers. If i want to add DOM nodes or modify one, i don’t care of removing it or document fragments, browsers care. To me it’s just noise. Almost all of the problems addressed by those techniques stem from lack of smartness in the browser, and that’s where fixes belong to, on the machine side. The fact that there are inept browser makers is no excuse. Fixes still belong to the machine, they’re repeatable and can be made automatic. We have a long history of programs automatically converting human friendly code to machine friendly code. They’re called compilers and the output either machine code or optimized javascript doesn’t matter.

So, learn about javascript performance since knowledge is always the way, but don’t turn yourself into a machine, you’d be an awful one. Use the tools and wait for browsers to catch up.

Google Test Automation Conference: Testing is not enough

federico — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:19:22 +0000

If i had to award the best talk at GTAC 2009, the no-brainer choice would be Prof. Niklaus Wirth opening talk. That’s not surprising if you consider who the speaker is, one of the great pioneers of computer science in the field of programming languages. What’s most surprising to me is that he presented a (pre)historical review of problems which turned out to be incredibly relevant today and, somehow, forced me to reframe my understanding of testing.

Building on 1972 Dijkstra dismissal of software testing

program testing can be a very effective way to show the presence of bugs, but is hopelessly inadequate for showing their absence.

Wirth explained that testing is treating symptoms instead of the disease, with the disease being our failure to prove correctness of programs by analytical means. This failure has its roots in distant past but it still holds today with languages and tools too complex and unreliable. Languages and tools providing proper abstraction, really hiding the system beneath, would give us the simple and rigorous ground to make programs easy to prove correct, so that no testing would be needed. Unfortunately, this looks far from happening

Programming languages are further from being mathematically nice than they were 50 years ago! They’re huge and complicated. They contain big libraries, and most of a programmer’s time is spent finding and learning the right libraries.

and again

What progress has this field actually made? We still struggle with the same problems as 50 years ago: iteration times, debugging, scratching our heads trying to figure out what went wrong.

How insightful! Empirical evidence that computer science made no sizable improvement in software construction is everywhere. It’s like a hamster in a wheel, running nowhere. Why is that? Maybe, we’ve been piling leaky abstractions on leaky abstractions, apparently hiding information without really simplifying, to the point where progress is drowning in complexity.

Testing is a nice way to easily lay down executable specifications, yet it requires maintenance and quickly degrades as we try to cover more cases. But when we code we have the chance to write self-describing programs which are executable specifications, reducing the coverage of tests needed, ideally to zero.

What does it mean in practice? Whenever it’s possible one should aim at declarative code. Domain specific languages and functional programming come to mind. The point being, if a program matches closely its specification, what’s left to test?

def factorial(n)
    if n == 0
        1
    else
        n * factorial(n-1)
    end
end

Code Katas: Programmer’s Deep Practice

federico — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:27:46 +0000

I’ve recently blogged about talent and how it’s grown through disciplined, committed, error focused practice at the edge of your ability, known as deep practice. I guess now it makes sense to approach it from the perspective of programming: What’s programmer’s deep practice? Unsurprisingly, inspiration can be found in the great japanese culture, people who highly value discipline and self improvement. Specifically i’m talking of martial arts. If you were to learn, say, karate you would go to a dojo and perform katas. If you happen to be a programmer, you can go to a coding dojo and practice code katas.

Code katas, a term first coined by Pragmatic Programmer Dave Thomas, are small programming exercises geared to hone a specific programming skill. Traditionally, they tend to be algorithmic like parsing or visiting graphs but could as well aim to improve understanding of particular programming paradigms, like functional or object oriented, or a specific language. Also, as remarkably pointed out by Matteo, katas can be crafted to master a certain technology like web or database. While, as you may guess, Coding Dojos are sites, groups or communities which propose and maintain collections of katas hopefully with solutions and reviews.

So, how do you practice? I suggest you solve a kata, review your work, compare it to other solutions, share your code with others and discuss it. Then solve it again trying to take a different path, balance pros and cons, then solve it again and again, until you feel you internalized the essence of the problem. Finally, you can move to another kata. If it feels like a lot of work, then you got it right. No question mastership requires time and effort but, then again, masters are those destined for greatness.

Resources

Katacasts
21 Code Katas by Dave Thomas
Lots of Code Quizzes with Ruby Solutions
Matteo Vaccari’s Technological Katas
Coding Dojo Code Katas
Corey Haines Video Solution in Ruby of String Template
Uncle Bob Code Katas (search “kata”, ie bowling kata)
Micah Martin on Code Katas and Video Solution in Ruby of Langton’s Ant
Micah Martin’s BattleShip Tournament
Google Code Jam
Jeff Atwood on Code Katas
Steve Yegge on Code Katas
Peter Norvig on Deep Practice