4 ms·
> What does "efficient" mean? If it means the distance your fingers have to travel, Dvorak is way more efficient. When you talk about efficiency, you need to b
by laureny 13y ago
> What does "efficient" mean? If it means the distance your fingers have to travel, Dvorak is way more efficient.
When you talk about efficiency, you need to be more specific.
It's not just that Dvorak's superiority over Qwerty for regular typing is very far from being clearly established, Dvorak is terrible for writing code, which requires a lot of non-alphabetical symbols such as {}, (), [], etc...
- beatgammit 13y agoDvorak is not terrible for writing code. I don't find it difficult at all. Parens are in the same place as on Qwerty, [] and /= have basically switched places (they're both about equally common), and the only real complaint I have is that ls -l abuses my pinky. I do not find myself hampered at all when writing code in Dvorak. If anything, it's better since 90% or so of what you write is identifiers, which are basically just short English phrases. Sure, it's possible to make a more optimized keyboard layout for writing code for a specific lannguage, but I find it to be great all-around. I'm a little sad about where : is (ViM uses it extensively, Go uses it pretty frequently), but alternating hands completely makes up for it (e.g. how often have you typed minimum in code; that by itself can cause RSI in Qwerty).
- jerf 13y agoI once did a scan over our entire code base for []{} vs /=?+, and it came out so close to even as to make no difference. Depending on your language mix, your mileage will vary, but this argument has less general power than people suppose. Dvorak is not terrible for writing code. This is to a large degree because none of /=?+[]{} are in the home row under any layout anyhow. You do lose semicolon under your pinky, but how many QWERTY users are truly touch typing anyhow?