4 ms·

Swap '_' with '-' to write code faster

2 points by ericrannaud 15y ago

RandallBrown 15y ago
how do you type minus then? Does this reverse the shift key?
- ericrannaud 15y ago
  Yeah. Press the key without modifier: get underscore '_'. Press the key with shift: get '-'. Return to default with: xmodmap -e 'keycode 20 = minus underscore minus underscore' (This is for a qwerty layout)
dkersten 15y ago
Or use a language where '-' is allowed in identifiers. '-' looks better than '_' anyway. Personally, I decided a while ago that I spend such a disproportionate amount of time writing code that its worth my while to customise my keyboard layout to make writing code quicker and easier. I now use colemak with caps lock mapped to control and left control mapped to backspace. I also mapped alt-gr to hard to reach symbols (everything except those that are already on the main keyboard), and since I can tap alt-gr with my right thumb real easy, I can now type symbols like - = ( ) ! + * _ & @ ! 0 and others with ease (the listed symbols are the easiest symbols for me because I have them mapped to my left hand while my right hand presses alt-gr). I spent ages debating with myself if its worth using a non-standard layout that I won't have on other computers, but in the end I figured I do so much coding on my own computer that if I had done this years ago (I used to think its not worthwhile), I would have saved a lot of effort. Some people say that thinking about code is the slow part, not typing, but the way I see it is that the faster I can type code the more down-time I have for the thinking, the faster I can experiment in a REPL and the faster I finish mundane typing tasks where I don't need time to think. I am now also planning on relearning my vi/vim commands to speed up my editing even more as I have forgotten a lot of what I knew a few years ago when I used vim a lot.
- ericrannaud 15y ago
  > Or use a language where '-' is allowed in identifiers. I have been a little obsessed with this question for a long time, and my interest in the LISP family of languages was in part driven by the use of '-'. This should have been a trivial consideration though. A keymap fix seems rather more logical than a change of language. I agree that being able to type code quickly and conveniently is important. We only have so much time, while we have so much code to write.
  - dkersten 15y ago
    Well I didn't seriously mean that one should switch language to type faster, just that the "problem" does not exist in languages that allow '-' in identifiers and that I feel '-' also looks a lot more natural too. I personally write a lot of C++ and Python code, neither of which allow '-' in identifiers, but I often wish they did (and would happily give up the ability to omit whitespace around operators) and while we're at it, why not allow + ! * and ? too. Having said that, I'm all for switching languages (if your work allows it - I totally understand that some people won't have that choice) if it speeds up your development in some way.
makecheck 15y ago
If you think about it most languages have sacrificed a lot simply to give mathematical operators their "traditional" ASCII meanings. Had character assignments been based on frequency of need or just convenience, you'd surely have seen things like minus-signs in variable names more often. I would love to see a UTF-8 or other Unicode keyboard so that it's very fast to enter "real" symbols (partially programmable too). Why for instance does my numeric keypad need another "/" or an asterisk...it could now have "÷" and "×" instead. In the next few years, given more common Unicode support in keyboards and companion programs (text editors and terminals already do a decent job), it would be interesting to see a language evolve to require actual symbols for known operators. Then you really would have to type "6 × 5 ÷ 3", not the ASCII hack "6 * 5 / 3". It would also allow very interesting hyper-operators (as seen in old environments such as the Mac's MPW Shell, and now Perl 6). Wait...don't let Larry Wall see this or we'll have a "$≠" variable or something in Perl 7. ;)
- ericrannaud 15y ago
  Well, the problem is that I don't see how it would be possible to have a keyboard like this that would be really fast to type with. Even a visual keyboard, as on a tablet, that could arguably display any set of symbols, would still not really be a solution. You can only show less than 100 keys at a time, and you would have to switch layouts all the time, e.g. to get to that special 'alpha' or '!=' key. I find full UTF-8 support in identifiers a regrettable idea because these symbols are generally impossible to type quickly. This makes programming languages less universal. And I'm not even talking about symbols that look nearly identical but are actually different Unicode characters. The only solution that I would find acceptable, personally, is to display certain identifiers or ASCII strings as fancy symbols. 'alpha', 'beta', '!=', 'ab / c' would be displayed using symbols, but the raw text file would contain the ASCII name. When editing a symbol, the actual name would be typed in. Or a syntax similar to Tex would be acceptable: '\alpha', '\dot', '\frac{10}{100}'. The display can be fancy, but the source file shouldn't be, IMO.
  - makecheck 15y ago
    If identifiers are displayed as symbols, that's really no different than having keyboard support; in both cases you're hoping you can hit (ideally) one key and have the keyboard do what you want. Keyboards already have modes like the Shift key, it's just a matter of kicking the programmability up a notch. And who knows, maybe keyboards grow slightly and gain a 2nd keypad (on the left) with some new "common" keys. Note that UTF-8 is quickly becoming the new "raw text file". The encoding of each symbol is very well defined and supported by programs already. It is actually better to have that exact definition than an ASCII word that may or may not be supported by all editors (and if it's not, as you said some symbols look similar; which one is intended?). I don't think keyboards will change much until some related tech becomes cheaper, too. Two key ones I think are cheap mini-displays per key (so the whole keyboard can display new glyphs if need be), and a companion touch-screen for drawing non-trivial glyphs that are needed only occasionally. Or maybe they just give up on the idea of physical keys entirely and attach large touch screens as "the whole keyboard" for a desktop machine.

2 points by ericrannaud 15y ago

RandallBrown 15y ago

how do you type minus then? Does this reverse the shift key?

ericrannaud 15y ago
Yeah. Press the key without modifier: get underscore '_'. Press the key with shift: get '-'. Return to default with: xmodmap -e 'keycode 20 = minus underscore minus underscore' (This is for a qwerty layout)

dkersten 15y ago

Or use a language where '-' is allowed in identifiers. '-' looks better than '_' anyway. Personally, I decided a while ago that I spend such a disproportionate amount of time writing code that its worth my while to customise my keyboard layout to make writing code quicker and easier. I now use colemak with caps lock mapped to control and left control mapped to backspace. I also mapped alt-gr to hard to reach symbols (everything except those that are already on the main keyboard), and since I can tap alt-gr with my right thumb real easy, I can now type symbols like - = ( ) ! + * _ & @ ! 0 and others with ease (the listed symbols are the easiest symbols for me because I have them mapped to my left hand while my right hand presses alt-gr). I spent ages debating with myself if its worth using a non-standard layout that I won't have on other computers, but in the end I figured I do so much coding on my own computer that if I had done this years ago (I used to think its not worthwhile), I would have saved a lot of effort. Some people say that thinking about code is the slow part, not typing, but the way I see it is that the faster I can type code the more down-time I have for the thinking, the faster I can experiment in a REPL and the faster I finish mundane typing tasks where I don't need time to think. I am now also planning on relearning my vi/vim commands to speed up my editing even more as I have forgotten a lot of what I knew a few years ago when I used vim a lot.

ericrannaud 15y ago
> Or use a language where '-' is allowed in identifiers. I have been a little obsessed with this question for a long time, and my interest in the LISP family of languages was in part driven by the use of '-'. This should have been a trivial consideration though. A keymap fix seems rather more logical than a change of language. I agree that being able to type code quickly and conveniently is important. We only have so much time, while we have so much code to write.
- dkersten 15y ago
  Well I didn't seriously mean that one should switch language to type faster, just that the "problem" does not exist in languages that allow '-' in identifiers and that I feel '-' also looks a lot more natural too. I personally write a lot of C++ and Python code, neither of which allow '-' in identifiers, but I often wish they did (and would happily give up the ability to omit whitespace around operators) and while we're at it, why not allow + ! * and ? too. Having said that, I'm all for switching languages (if your work allows it - I totally understand that some people won't have that choice) if it speeds up your development in some way.

makecheck 15y ago

If you think about it most languages have sacrificed a lot simply to give mathematical operators their "traditional" ASCII meanings. Had character assignments been based on frequency of need or just convenience, you'd surely have seen things like minus-signs in variable names more often. I would love to see a UTF-8 or other Unicode keyboard so that it's very fast to enter "real" symbols (partially programmable too). Why for instance does my numeric keypad need another "/" or an asterisk...it could now have "÷" and "×" instead. In the next few years, given more common Unicode support in keyboards and companion programs (text editors and terminals already do a decent job), it would be interesting to see a language evolve to require actual symbols for known operators. Then you really would have to type "6 × 5 ÷ 3", not the ASCII hack "6 * 5 / 3". It would also allow very interesting hyper-operators (as seen in old environments such as the Mac's MPW Shell, and now Perl 6). Wait...don't let Larry Wall see this or we'll have a "$≠" variable or something in Perl 7. ;)

ericrannaud 15y ago
Well, the problem is that I don't see how it would be possible to have a keyboard like this that would be really fast to type with. Even a visual keyboard, as on a tablet, that could arguably display any set of symbols, would still not really be a solution. You can only show less than 100 keys at a time, and you would have to switch layouts all the time, e.g. to get to that special 'alpha' or '!=' key. I find full UTF-8 support in identifiers a regrettable idea because these symbols are generally impossible to type quickly. This makes programming languages less universal. And I'm not even talking about symbols that look nearly identical but are actually different Unicode characters. The only solution that I would find acceptable, personally, is to display certain identifiers or ASCII strings as fancy symbols. 'alpha', 'beta', '!=', 'ab / c' would be displayed using symbols, but the raw text file would contain the ASCII name. When editing a symbol, the actual name would be typed in. Or a syntax similar to Tex would be acceptable: '\alpha', '\dot', '\frac{10}{100}'. The display can be fancy, but the source file shouldn't be, IMO.
- makecheck 15y ago
  If identifiers are displayed as symbols, that's really no different than having keyboard support; in both cases you're hoping you can hit (ideally) one key and have the keyboard do what you want. Keyboards already have modes like the Shift key, it's just a matter of kicking the programmability up a notch. And who knows, maybe keyboards grow slightly and gain a 2nd keypad (on the left) with some new "common" keys. Note that UTF-8 is quickly becoming the new "raw text file". The encoding of each symbol is very well defined and supported by programs already. It is actually better to have that exact definition than an ASCII word that may or may not be supported by all editors (and if it's not, as you said some symbols look similar; which one is intended?). I don't think keyboards will change much until some related tech becomes cheaper, too. Two key ones I think are cheap mini-displays per key (so the whole keyboard can display new glyphs if need be), and a companion touch-screen for drawing non-trivial glyphs that are needed only occasionally. Or maybe they just give up on the idea of physical keys entirely and attach large touch screens as "the whole keyboard" for a desktop machine.