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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #50064 > unrolled thread

Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors]

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

Contents

  Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2013-07-06 09:10 -0500
    Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-07-06 08:04 -0700
      Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-07-06 09:39 -0600
      Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.demon.co.uk> - 2013-07-08 23:44 +0100
    Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-07-07 02:41 +0000
      Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] jussij@zeusedit.com - 2013-07-07 22:34 -0700
        Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-07-08 07:39 +0000
        Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Jason Friedman <jsf80238@gmail.com> - 2013-07-08 22:27 -0600
          Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2013-07-09 12:12 +0000
            Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-07-09 17:04 -0400
    Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Giorgos Tzampanakis <giorgos.tzampanakis@gmail.com> - 2013-07-08 06:54 +0000
      Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Xue Fuqiao <xfq.free@gmail.com> - 2013-07-10 12:17 +0800
        Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] jussij@zeusedit.com - 2013-07-10 21:15 -0700
          Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-07-11 09:45 -0400
            Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Paul Rudin <paul.nospam@rudin.co.uk> - 2013-07-11 16:42 +0100
              Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-07-12 01:50 +1000
                Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-07-12 04:24 +0000
                  Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-07-12 14:34 +1000
                  Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] "Eric S. Johansson" <esj@harvee.org> - 2013-07-12 00:57 -0400
                  Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-07-12 18:34 -0400
                  Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] "Eric S. Johansson" <esj@harvee.org> - 2013-07-12 18:54 -0400
            Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-07-12 02:39 +0000
              Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-07-12 12:50 +1000
              Re: Editor Ergonomics [was: Important features for editors] Giorgos Tzampanakis <giorgos.tzampanakis@gmail.com> - 2013-07-14 17:12 +0000

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#50561

On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 18:34:30 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber  
<wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>
> 	Sounds like you might have liked an accessory I had on my Amiga.
> Basically a proportional joystick feeding an interface box which  
> converted
> the position value into a sequence of mouse movements --

sounds very cool. Although after I wrote my little screed, I found myself  
fiddling with my smartphone and I realized I was subconsciously putting it  
through the motions if it was a positioning device.

The gross motion is detected by the accelerometer's in the phone. The fine  
positioning by fingers on the screen.

Just thinking out loud.

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

#50485

On Thu, 11 Jul 2013 09:45:33 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:

> In article <2fdf282e-fd28-4ba3-8c83-aaaace1201ec@googlegroups.com>,
>  jussij@zeusedit.com wrote:
> 
>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:17:12 PM UTC+10, Xue Fuqiao wrote:
>> 
>> > * It is especially handy for selecting and deleting text.
>> 
>> When coding I never use a mouse to select text regions or to delete
>> text.
>> 
>> These operations I do using just the keyboard.
> 
> For good typists, there is high overhead to getting your hands oriented
> on the keyboard (that's why the F and J keys have little bumps).  So,
> any time you move your hand from the keyboard to the mouse, you pay a
> price.
> 
> The worst thing is to constantly be alternating between mouse actions
> and keyboard actions.  You spend all your time getting your fingers
> hands re-oriented.  That's slow.

Big deal. I am utterly unconvinced that raw typing speed is even close to 
a bottleneck when programming. Data entry and transcribing from (say) 
dictated text, yes. Coding, not unless you are a one-fingered hunt-and-
peek typist. The bottleneck is not typing speed but thinking speed: 
thinking about program design and APIs, thinking about data structures 
and algorithms, debugging, etc.

Programming is normally done in spurts of typing followed by longer 
periods of thinking, testing, debugging. Micro-optimizing for the 
fraction of a second it takes to re-orient your hand on the keyboard is 
silly -- even if it is an optimization, not a pessimization (and I remain 
unconvinced) -- it's utterly trivial. Who cares that you saved 0.1 of a 
second by not moving your hand off the keyboard when you then sit there 
for 20 minutes staring into space thinking about your program design?

Keyboard commands for yanking an entire line beat the mouse, but for 
moving the cursor around to arbitrary positions, or copying arbitrary 
pieces of text, a mouse is much faster. But either way, who cares? Typing 
speed is only rarely the bottleneck, let alone micro-optimizations like 
these.

The difference between a 60 wpm typist and a 90 wpm typist is normally 
that the 90 wpm typist can introduce bugs 50% faster :-) I'm joking, of 
course, but typing *accuracy* is far more important than typing speed.


-- 
Steven

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

#50486

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> Big deal. I am utterly unconvinced that raw typing speed is even close to
> a bottleneck when programming. Data entry and transcribing from (say)
> dictated text, yes. Coding, not unless you are a one-fingered hunt-and-
> peek typist. The bottleneck is not typing speed but thinking speed:
> thinking about program design and APIs, thinking about data structures
> and algorithms, debugging, etc.
>
> Programming is normally done in spurts of typing followed by longer
> periods of thinking, testing, debugging.

That's true, but it's still important to be able to type quickly. You
spend a minute or two figuring what you need to be doing, then want to
see the result as quickly as possible. The plan is in your brain; you
need to transfer it into code, save it, compile it if you need to,
deploy it to your test-box if you need to, trigger its execution, and
see its output. That's a roughly linear process, so any time saved in
any step is an overall saving, and the shorter the total time from
brain to output, the more smoothly your debugging/tinkering will be.
That's why I've spent time developing systems at work that reduce the
times required. With a single keystroke (F7 in SciTE), I can save,
compile (for the one or two components that actually get compiled),
and deploy to test-box, and a quick SIGHUP via Upstart does the rest.
I can try two or three iterations of something without "losing" what
my brain's holding onto - more if it's a trivial edit. Poor typing
speed, or replacing the F7 whack with a button click that demands a
mouse, would damage that.

ChrisA

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

#50645

On 2013-07-12, Steven D'Aprano wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Jul 2013 09:45:33 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
>
>> In article <2fdf282e-fd28-4ba3-8c83-aaaace1201ec@googlegroups.com>,
>>  jussij@zeusedit.com wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:17:12 PM UTC+10, Xue Fuqiao wrote:
>>> 
>>> > * It is especially handy for selecting and deleting text.
>>> 
>>> When coding I never use a mouse to select text regions or to delete
>>> text.
>>> 
>>> These operations I do using just the keyboard.
>> 
>> For good typists, there is high overhead to getting your hands oriented
>> on the keyboard (that's why the F and J keys have little bumps).  So,
>> any time you move your hand from the keyboard to the mouse, you pay a
>> price.
>> 
>> The worst thing is to constantly be alternating between mouse actions
>> and keyboard actions.  You spend all your time getting your fingers
>> hands re-oriented.  That's slow.
>
> Big deal. I am utterly unconvinced that raw typing speed is even close to 
> a bottleneck when programming. Data entry and transcribing from (say) 
> dictated text, yes. Coding, not unless you are a one-fingered hunt-and-
> peek typist. The bottleneck is not typing speed but thinking speed: 
> thinking about program design and APIs, thinking about data structures 
> and algorithms, debugging, etc.

Typing time is definitely a small portion of coding time. However,
since I learned touch typing I have found that I can work more hours
without getting tired. It used to be that the repetitive up-down motion of
the head was quickly leading to headaches and general tiredness.

-- 
Real (i.e. statistical) tennis and snooker player rankings and ratings:
http://www.statsfair.com/ 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

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

csiph-web