5 ms·

Even for US keyboards, the obviously better step is to replace "(" and ")" with "9" and "0" -- familiar key location but without the shift key. Plus you avoid

by pseut 14y ago

Even for US keyboards, the obviously better step is to replace "(" and ")" with "9" and "0" -- familiar key location but without the shift key. Plus you avoid using the pinky finger which is an ergonomic win. Edit: note that there might be a small tradeoff in readability.

mackwic 14y ago
I know some lisp programmers who uses this[1] to code. The left foot pedal open a parenthesis, the right one close all parenthesis. I find that's quite clever, though, considering the use of theses two characters. [1]: http://img2.generation-nt.com/xbox-360-pedalier_090320025800048201.jpg http://img2.generation-nt.com/xbox-360-pedalier_090320025800...
- danneu 14y ago
  With a s-expr edit tool like Paredit, you never have to write closing delimiters.
  - mackwic 14y ago
    Is the code still readable ?
    - Tcepsa 14y ago
      The code comes out looking the same; Paredit helps manage the parentheses for you (especially the closing ones, which it inserts automatically).
      - reeses 14y ago
        Some might even call it "electric!"
leoc 14y ago
I've said it before: j and k are the obvious replacements if you want to ruthlessly Huffman-code your Lisp-typing experience. I, mean how often do you really see j or k inside the text of an atom? Not very often.
- pseut 14y ago
  > how often do you really see j or k inside the text of an atom? Just enclose j and k in parentheses on those rare occasions. Problem solved.