5 ms·

>> For some reason computer people are so conservative [...] Well, one of the underlying reasons for the lack of imagination might be... keyboards. If keyboard

by slx26 5y ago

>> For some reason computer people are so conservative [...] Well, one of the underlying reasons for the lack of imagination might be... keyboards. If keyboard keys were small e-ink displays, easily configurable and accessible by programs, programmers would have come up with a lot of interesting stuff already. We do it with function icons in regular interfaces. If we could intergrate with keyboards, we'd definitely take advantage of it. Now, there might be many more reasons. The article also mentions subroutines displayed horizontally and other stuff. That could definitely be done too, but... while we aren't there yet, many interfaces definitely make good use of horizontal screen space. The main problem is that to do any of these, you kinda require coordination beyond the scope of solving a single technical problem. Unless the right hardware is available to enough people, custom symbols and keys and whatever would only work experimentally. And it would be a worthy experiment, but developing a language is already enough work to also have to add a custom revolutionary IDE to the mix, in the context of experimentation. In the current economic system, when the path to market is long and unclear most good ideas die anonymously.

breck 5y ago
> If keyboard keys were small e-ink displays, easily configurable and accessible by programs, programmers would have come up with a lot of interesting stuff already. The touchbar on my M1 Macbook Pro does this. It makes using Emojis a lot easier. I incorporate emojis into my languages more and more nowadays.
xienze 5y ago
> Well, one of the underlying reasons for the lack of imagination might be... keyboards. That and the fact that it would probably take me longer to search for whatever obscure mathematical symbol is supposed to represent <whatever> than it would take to just type out its name. And ASCII is just easier to deal with.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  Another problem with Unicode is far too many symbols for different Unicode characters are too similar looking, or even identical. Then there are the Unicode symbols that convey semantic information rather than just the appearance. These are an abomination and should never have been put in Unicode, but here we are anyway.
  - a1369209993 5y ago
    Don't forget different Unicode code points for the same character, like U+4B/U+212A(/U+39A/U+41A/...).
bradrn 5y ago
> If we could intergrate with keyboards, we'd definitely take advantage of it. From my own personal experience this is extremely true. A while back I made myself a custom keyboard [0] which can enter lots of characters, mostly for linguistic tasks. I didn’t intend to start using it for things outside linguistics, but before long I was using it everywhere — and my inventory of available characters expanded correspondingly. I started to use curvy quotes and em/en-dashes in all my writings (even in this post!), and — more topically — I started using Unicode symbols in my programming, when possible. I don’t use them too much, mostly because there’s little need for them, but in scientific tasks it’s really useful to be able to type e.g. ‘λ’ instead of ‘wavelength’. I predict that as Unicode symbols become easier to input, programming languages will indeed start to utilise them more — the limiting factor is keyboard layout. (Indeed we can already see the start of this process in Julia, Raku and Haskell.) [0] https://github.com/bradrn/Conkey https://github.com/bradrn/Conkey
- toomanyducks 5y ago
  If I see a character I can't enter in someone's code, I think I'll run away. It's cool and all for your code, but sooner or later someone else is going to have to deal with it.
  - bradrn 5y ago
    I agree, which is why I avoid Unicode for anything someone else will need to type in, or at least give ASCII alternatives when possible. I use it mainly for things like local variable and parameter names.
  - b2gills 5y ago
    I think it matters who your audience is. If your audience is mostly programmers then just use `*` If your audience is physicists or mathematicians then `×` or `·` may be a better fit. When turning a math expression into code, it is often handy if the code looks a lot like the expression. Even better if you can just copy and paste it. It's hard to translate an expression wrong if you aren't translating it at all.
- creata 5y ago
ta988 5y ago
If keyboards were only usable like that, we would have a problem of accessibility of the technology even worse than what it currently is.
chewxy 5y ago
> If keyboard keys were small e-ink displays, easily configurable and accessible by programs, programmers would have come up with a lot of interesting stuff already. I have a QMK based keyboard. The most interesting thing I did was to have an APL layer on my keyboard. I wouldn't say it's "a lot of interesting stuff"
tgbugs 5y ago
Sadly these did not take off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_Maximus_keyboard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_Maximus_keyboard

by slx26 5y ago

breck 5y ago

> If keyboard keys were small e-ink displays, easily configurable and accessible by programs, programmers would have come up with a lot of interesting stuff already. The touchbar on my M1 Macbook Pro does this. It makes using Emojis a lot easier. I incorporate emojis into my languages more and more nowadays.

xienze 5y ago

> Well, one of the underlying reasons for the lack of imagination might be... keyboards. That and the fact that it would probably take me longer to search for whatever obscure mathematical symbol is supposed to represent <whatever> than it would take to just type out its name. And ASCII is just easier to deal with.

WalterBright 5y ago
Another problem with Unicode is far too many symbols for different Unicode characters are too similar looking, or even identical. Then there are the Unicode symbols that convey semantic information rather than just the appearance. These are an abomination and should never have been put in Unicode, but here we are anyway.
- a1369209993 5y ago
  Don't forget different Unicode code points for the same character, like U+4B/U+212A(/U+39A/U+41A/...).

bradrn 5y ago

> If we could intergrate with keyboards, we'd definitely take advantage of it. From my own personal experience this is extremely true. A while back I made myself a custom keyboard [0] which can enter lots of characters, mostly for linguistic tasks. I didn’t intend to start using it for things outside linguistics, but before long I was using it everywhere — and my inventory of available characters expanded correspondingly. I started to use curvy quotes and em/en-dashes in all my writings (even in this post!), and — more topically — I started using Unicode symbols in my programming, when possible. I don’t use them too much, mostly because there’s little need for them, but in scientific tasks it’s really useful to be able to type e.g. ‘λ’ instead of ‘wavelength’. I predict that as Unicode symbols become easier to input, programming languages will indeed start to utilise them more — the limiting factor is keyboard layout. (Indeed we can already see the start of this process in Julia, Raku and Haskell.) [0] https://github.com/bradrn/Conkey https://github.com/bradrn/Conkey

toomanyducks 5y ago
If I see a character I can't enter in someone's code, I think I'll run away. It's cool and all for your code, but sooner or later someone else is going to have to deal with it.
- bradrn 5y ago
  I agree, which is why I avoid Unicode for anything someone else will need to type in, or at least give ASCII alternatives when possible. I use it mainly for things like local variable and parameter names.
- b2gills 5y ago
  I think it matters who your audience is. If your audience is mostly programmers then just use `*` If your audience is physicists or mathematicians then `×` or `·` may be a better fit. When turning a math expression into code, it is often handy if the code looks a lot like the expression. Even better if you can just copy and paste it. It's hard to translate an expression wrong if you aren't translating it at all.
creata 5y ago

ta988 5y ago

If keyboards were only usable like that, we would have a problem of accessibility of the technology even worse than what it currently is.

chewxy 5y ago

> If keyboard keys were small e-ink displays, easily configurable and accessible by programs, programmers would have come up with a lot of interesting stuff already. I have a QMK based keyboard. The most interesting thing I did was to have an APL layer on my keyboard. I wouldn't say it's "a lot of interesting stuff"

tgbugs 5y ago

Sadly these did not take off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_Maximus_keyboard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_Maximus_keyboard