On Editors and their Benefits

I've been using Emacs for about as long as I've been programming. So that makes it nearly eight years now. I like to think that I've gotten reasonably competent with it, and somewhat more importantly, I have customized my emacs to fit my mind like a glove.

I also touch type, but I use the Dvorak keyboard layout. These two things combine to make it so that I can write programs at a speed close to how fast I can conceive them. This is important, not because it means I can code faster than other people, but because it means I can get the thoughts out of my head fast enough that they don't slip away.

This was brought into sharp relief for me a few days ago when I did some pairing with my mentor Zach using his computer. You see, Zach uses the standard QWERTY layout, and he also uses Vim.

It seems that the accepted wisdom about pair programming is that it works best when two people share the same computer, and swap control of the keyboard back and forth. Some sources even recommend having two sets of keyboard/mouse to lower the barrier to switching even further. In the spirit of being open to trying new things I acquiesced to Zach's implicit expectation that I would use his computer with QWERTY and Vim.

It's been a long time since I've seriously attempted to use QWERTY. When I first taught myself to touch-type in Dvorak I tried to maintain some proficiency with QWERTY since it is ubiquitous. But I soon discovered that it was hard to keep both locations for keys in muscle memory at the same time. And that's really where efficient touch typing requires that knowledge to reside. When you have to consult your memory for the location of key, you've already lost a lot of your speed.

Luckily for me, I could keep on typing QWERTY as I always had; that is, by looking at the keyboard constantly and lifting my fingers high enough off the keyboard that I could see the letters.

Muscle memory is important to my usage of Emacs too, and it builds heavily on my Dvorak muscle memory. Emacs has a (deserved) reputation for having a somewhat absurd number of key bindings. Trying to remember them directly would be a monumental task. Instead, the most commonly used key bindings migrate quickly from the realm of conscious thought to muscle memory. I didn't even notice this happening until I started trying to teach a friend of mine to use Emacs. Some of the commands that I use, I know only by their location on the keyboard. Given that I type in Dvorak and the keys are labeled in QWERTY this means that the actual character I'm pressing is pretty opaque.

When is proficiency or familiarity with a tool more important than other considerations?

First let's look a bit at what those other considerations might be. The first one that comes to mind is that using the same tools as the team you're working on can be pretty important. Or maybe there is another tool that has much more powerful or focused facilities for the task/language/domain. Or to reverse that, possibly your tool of choice simply lacks something that a lot of other tools support. Finally, I think a really important consideration is whether you are holding on to your tool(s) of choice out of habit and the comfort they provide. Let's look at some examples of each of these.

A few years ago I was hired as an intern at Sage Bionetworks, a small bio-tech start-up in Seattle. They happen to be an all Java shop, and the standard editing environment there is Eclipse. At the time, I was much less familiar with Emacs, I had never even opened Eclipse and I didn't know any Java.

I spent my first few days getting through the administrative details of starting a new job. But pretty quickly I got to the point where I needed to setup my new computer for doing development on the Sage web platform. They had a wiki, with several different pages on the bootstrapping process for the various different aspects of the process. A significant portion of it was focused on getting your Eclipse installation setup correctly, with all the right plugins and such.

Being totally in love with Emacs at that time, I determined that I was going to figure out how to setup Emacs as a kick-ass Java editing environment. My mentor was grudgingly amenable to this plan of action. I struggled with that problem for a few days, until my mentor came back and strongly suggested that I use Eclipse. His rationale was essentially that this was the tool that the whole team had standardized on. Since no one else really used the command line tools to build or test the product I would be largely on my own in getting things to work.

I gave in, and learned to use Eclipse. I made it bearable by installing a plugin that simulated Emacs key bindings. I learned there were some nice things about Eclipse - the automatic versioning, the Java refactoring tools. But I also found it to generally be a vastly inferior tool. While Eclipse has an extensive ecosystem of plugins and add-ons, installing them is a nightmare of clicking through GUI menus and needing to restart possibly several times. It is also highly customizable, with good support for key maps and visual modifications. However, neither your personally installed add-ins nor your configurations can be saved in a reasonable way, and there is (as far as I know) no way to automate the setup process. So every time you move to a new development machine, you need to go through the same process. Or, more likely, go through a very similar process, and end up with a subtly different dev environment.

But I did get the benefit of being able to get the advice of the other devs on the team when something wasn't working with my build. This turned out to be critical since the process of getting a working (and repeatable) build of their software was a highly non-trivial one.

When I was working with Zach last week and ended up using Vim with QWERTY, he said something to me that reminded of my mentor's words at Sage. He said that a lot of people at 8th Light use Vim, and that if I want to do a lot of pairing with people it will probably be to my benefit to learn how to use Vim at least a little bit.

This makes more sense in an environment where pairing is actively practiced, but the general idea behind it is basically the prospect of being able to sit down at someone else's computer and use it for development at a reasonable level. I'm not sure that I agree with this philosophy though.

One place where being able to use any given computer is key is as a sysadmin. My college's CS department started participating in a national competition during my second year, the Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition or CCDC. The competition itself basically places several teams of students in the role of a new system administration team for some large corporation. The system is potentially in disarray after a poorly documented transition from a previous team and the students task is to secure the systems while maintaining a given level of availability for one or more different services (such as email, databases, servers, etc.).

I was very interested in participating in the club that was preparing for the competition because they were learning both defensive and offensive computer security skills. But I found it difficult to work in the context of system's administration because I couldn't have my environment setup just how I wanted it. Particularly during the competition itself, there would be no time to try and install Emacs (which is both large in footprint and memory usage and requires a ton of dependencies), or switch the terminal at the computer I was using to Dvorak. Thus I found that two choices I had made years before had effectively precluded my participation in the CCDC.

Interestingly, my choice to learn the Dvorak layout is actually what pushed me into learning Emacs. I had just gotten to the point of actual touch-typing with Dvorak when I decided it was time to switch from using PythonWin to a "real programmer's editor." Based on what I had been reading on the internet, that choice seemed clear: it had to be Vim.

But I was stalled almost immediately. Vim uses the letters 'h', 'j', 'k', and 'l' for text navigation, so you don't need to move your hand to the arrow keys. This is convenient for usage under QWERTY, all four keys are on the home row and are easily accessible - without stretching - to your right hand. But on Dvorak they are all over the keyboard, and there is no mnemonic for telling which key does what.

I struggled with Vim for a few days, trying to learn how I could remap the movement keys to the same location under Dvorak as they are in QWERTY. But I was unable to find a solution and the prospect of the cascading key remappings was enough to drive me to look at Emacs. By contrast with Vim, most of the keys in Emacs have some kind of mnemonic association. Moving forward a character is ctrl f and back is ctrl b. Down one line is ctrl n and up is ctrl p for next and previous. Not only that, but part of the very philosophy of Emacs is easy customization, up to and including remapping every key on your keyboard to do something different. More importantly, that philosophy of customization is embedded in the Emacs community.

The seemingly simple choice of learning to type in Dvorak turned out to be a key decision in my life as a programmer. It cut off certain possibilities like learning to use Vim, and presents certain challenges for pair programming, particularly in the quick back-and-forth style where two people use the same computer. I have also found that using Emacs appears to be the less common of the two, and this is also limiting and isolating to some degree.

Here's the thing though, I like using Emacs; and typing in Dvorak feels good to my fingers. So I'm a little bit stuck. I want to be agreeable and able to collaborate and pair program with others easily. But I also really like the tools that I use. They fit me. So what do I do?

One possibility is to use more tools to overcome some of my difficulties with pairing. Specifically, using a lightweight version control system (like git) and a free code hosting site (like, say, Github) you can arrange a style of pairing where two people work on the same code, but each using their own device and tools and setup. Pairing is the same during the actual coding process with whatever Driver/Navigator or other dynamic you want to use. The difference comes when you swap. Instead of simply sliding the keyboard across to your partner, you commit, and push to your central repository. Your partner then pulls down the latest code and starts working on their machine. This is certainly a bit more work than just handing off the keyboard, so it may not be suitable to very rapid hand-offs. But I haven't found it to be overly onerous so far.

Another solution would be for me to maintain some skill at QWERTY and Vim specifically for facilitating pairing. While more work for me personally, it has the benefit of not requiring a new pairing workflow. But this idea worries me a bit.

The human brain is amazingly flexible. My favorite personal example of this is related to video games and how we control them. Every first-person style game has at least one key setting in the control options: whether the way you look upwards is by moving the mouse or tilting the control stick upwards (usually known as "default" or "normal"), or whether this mapping is "inverted" i.e. tilting up looks down and tilting down looks up. My best friend and I have played a lot of Halo together in our day. For a long time one of our favorite pastimes was playing through Halo 2 levels on Legendary difficulty, often with skulls active. Here's the thing though: he plays default, and I play inverted.

Under most circumstances this doesn't matter. If we're playing cooperatively it doesn't matter because we both have our own controller and thus our own setting. It only becomes an issue when we are handing a controller back and forth. But boy is it a problem then. Invariably we both forget to switch back at the hand-off and there ensues a brief period of confusion and panic when the game character doesn't respond as our brain is wired to think it should. What's really fascinating though is how quickly my brain starts to retrain itself.

I've been playing games on inverted for years, possibly decades at this point. As such you would think that my brain is very much hardwired to expect that when I tilt the stick up, the view will move down. And this is true. But sometimes, for one reason or another I'll end up playing for a short time on the default setting. What happens is remarkable and incredibly frustrating. If I focus on trying to remember that up means up and down means down, I can usually get to a level that is usable - at least when I pay full attention. But as soon as something intense happens like a bad guy jumping out from behind a bush, my reflexes revert to inverted settings. Even more interestingly though, when I inevitably switch my control scheme back to inverted I am unable to fully shed the tendency towards trying to play with default look controls.

Back to keyboard layouts and editors. In short, I'm concerned that an attempt to learn how to use QWERTY again and to memorize Vim keyboard shortcuts will seriously undermine my ability to use Emacs effectively.

On the other hand, maybe this is just what I need. I'm also currently trying to learn how to do Test Driven Development (TDD) and I'm finding that a lot of the thought-habits I have around programming are actually detrimental to doing TDD. Maybe breaking out of my comfortable Emacs environment and using a new keyboard layout will help me get into a totally new frame of mind and let me TDD more effectively.

I think there is another reason to embrace the idea of learning a new set of tools at this time though. A large part of the reason that I wanted to do this apprenticeship with 8th Light was to learn. Learning from others always requires some humility; at the very least you have to be able to admit that there are things that you do not know. This is difficult for me. But possibly, intentionally cultivating Shoshin or "beginner's mind" regarding my most basic level of programming - how I edit my source code - will help me do it at all levels.

In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities, in the expert's mind there are few. - Shunryu Suzuki

2603 Words