Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #7513 > unrolled thread

Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2011-06-13 19:53 +0530
    Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs. Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout? Xah Lee <xahlee@gmail.com> - 2011-06-14 00:39 -0700
      Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs. Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout? Xah Lee <xahlee@gmail.com> - 2011-06-14 00:43 -0700

#7513 — Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?

On Jun 13, 6:19 pm, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:

> Even if we accept that Dvorak is an optimization, it's a micro-
> optimization.

+1

Dvorak -- like qwerty and any other keyboard layout -- assumes the
computer is a typewriter.
This means in effect at least two constraints, necessary for the
typewriter but not for the computer:

a. The typist can type only 1 key at a time
b. One (key)stroke generates exactly 1 letter

Exceptions to <a> are Shift (Ctrl) etc but clearly in running use they
are the exception not the rule.

> Where speed really is vital, such as for court stenographers, special mechanical
> shorthand machines such as stenotypes are used, costing thousands of dollars but allowing
> the typist to reach speeds of over 300 wpm.

Yes, instruments like stenotypes speed up typing by unassuming <a>
Likewise pianists can be said (and seen) to do more at the piano than
typists at a computer because chords are part of the 'allowed
language'.

Assumption <b> likewise is unnecessarily restrictive on a computer.
Think of all the 'abbrev/snippet/shortform/template' systems like
yasnippet, textmate-snippets, emacs/vi abbrevs etc.

For ordinary English there are things like keyscript
http://www.freewebs.com/cassyjanek

For example the most common words (estimated to be around 40% of
English) are shortformed as:
b = but
c = with
d = had
e = this
f = of
g = that
h = the
j = which
n = and
...etc etc upto
z = was

then common phrases
able to  = cb
had been = dn
do not   = dx
did not  = ex
does not = dsx

etc

Clearly, for programmers this is unlikely to be much use --
programming languages are not English.

But but it is certainly an open question whether if the repeating
patterns in programming languages are captured into some system, the
resulting benefit would be a mere micro-optimization or something more
significant.  I have seen some good programmers swear by
emacs-yasnippets, textmate-snippets etc.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#7591 — Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs. Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?

Ba Wha 13, 7:23 nz, Ehfgbz Zbql 〔ehfgbzcz...@tznvy.pbz〕 jebgr:
│ Qibenx -- yvxr djregl naq nal bgure xrlobneq ynlbhg -- nffhzrf gur
│ pbzchgre vf n glcrjevgre.
│ Guvf zrnaf va rssrpg ng yrnfg gjb pbafgenvagf, arprffnel sbe gur
│ glcrjevgre ohg abg sbe gur pbzchgre:
│
│ n. Gur glcvfg pna glcr bayl 1 xrl ng n gvzr
│ o. Bar (xrl)fgebxr trarengrf rknpgyl 1 yrggre
│
│ Rkprcgvbaf gb [n] ner Fuvsg (Pgey) rgp ohg pyrneyl va ehaavat hfr
gurl
│ ner gur rkprcgvba abg gur ehyr.
│
│ │ Jurer fcrrq ernyyl vf ivgny, fhpu nf sbe pbheg fgrabtencuref,
fcrpvny zrpunavpny
│ │ fubegunaq znpuvarf fhpu nf fgrabglcrf ner hfrq, pbfgvat gubhfnaqf
bs qbyynef ohg nyybjvat
│ │ gur glcvfg gb ernpu fcrrqf bs bire 300 jcz.
│
│ Lrf, vafgehzragf yvxr fgrabglcrf fcrrq hc glcvat ol hanffhzvat [n]
│ Yvxrjvfr cvnavfgf pna or fnvq (naq frra) gb qb zber ng gur cvnab
guna
│ glcvfgf ng n pbzchgre orpnhfr pubeqf ner cneg bs gur 'nyybjrq
│ ynathntr'.
│
│ Nffhzcgvba [o] yvxrjvfr vf haarprffnevyl erfgevpgvir ba n pbzchgre.
│ Guvax bs nyy gur 'nooeri/favccrg/fubegsbez/grzcyngr' flfgrzf yvxr
│ lnfavccrg, grkgzngr-favccrgf, rznpf/iv nooerif rgp.
│
│ Sbe beqvanel Ratyvfu gurer ner guvatf yvxr xrlfpevcguggc://jjj.serrjrof.pbz/pnfflwnarx
│
│ Sbe rknzcyr gur zbfg pbzzba jbeqf (rfgvzngrq gb or nebhaq 40% bs
│ Ratyvfu) ner fubegsbezrq nf:
│ o = ohg
│ p = jvgu
│ q = unq
│ r = guvf
│ s = bs
│ t = gung
│ u = gur
│ w = juvpu
│ a = naq
│ ...rgp rgp hcgb
│ m = jnf
│
│ gura pbzzba cuenfrf
│ noyr gb  = po
│ unq orra = qa
│ qb abg   = qk
│ qvq abg  = rk
│ qbrf abg = qfk
│
│ rgp
│
│ Pyrneyl, sbe cebtenzzref guvf vf hayvxryl gb or zhpu hfr --
│ cebtenzzvat ynathntrf ner abg Ratyvfu.
│
│ Ohg ohg vg vf pregnvayl na bcra dhrfgvba jurgure vs gur ercrngvat
│ cnggreaf va cebtenzzvat ynathntrf ner pncgherq vagb fbzr flfgrz, gur
│ erfhygvat orarsvg jbhyq or n zrer zvpeb-bcgvzvmngvba be fbzrguvat
zber
│ fvtavsvpnag.  V unir frra fbzr tbbq cebtenzzref fjrne ol
│ rznpf-lnfavccrgf, grkgzngr-favccrgf rgp.

gurer'f fcrpvny vachg qrivprf qrfvtarq sbe pubeqvat, pnyyrq pubeqvat
xrlobneq. Gurer'f qngnunaq. Ybbx hc Jvxvcrqvn sbe n yvfg.

gurer'f nyfb xvarfvf naq bguref gung jbexf jvgu sbbg crqnyf. Fb, vg'f
yvxr pubeqvat jvgu lbhe srrg gbb. Rire frra gubfr penml betnavfg jvgu
srrg ohfl ba 30 crqnyf?

unir lbh gevrq ibvpr vachg? Jvaqbjf pbzrf jvgu vg. Cerggl tbbq.
Gubhtu, qbrfa'g jbex fb jryy jvgu nccf vzcyrzragrq bhgfvqr bs ZF'f
senzrjbex, fhpu nf rznpf.

fbzr cebtenzre'f fbyhgvbaf:

〈Pryroevgl Cebtenzref jvgu EFV (Ercrgvgvir Fgenva Vawhel)〉
 uggc://knuyrr.bet/rznpf/rznpf_unaq_cnva_pryroevgl.ugzy

 Knu

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7593 — Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs. Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?

for some reason, was unable to post the previous message. (but can
post others) So, the message is rot13'd and it works. Not sure what's
up with Google groups. (this happened a few years back once.
Apparantly, the message content  might have something to do with it
because rot13 clearly works. Yet, the problem doesnt seem to be my
name or embedded url, since it only happens with the previous message)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web