Hacker News Reader

Comment by stkdump | Hacker News Reader

The modern universal keywords if, else, for and while are good because they are fairly short and thus quick to type.

I don't know if "quick to type" has ever been a reason?

Short words mattered in the early days, with punch cards, very limited memory and computing power, shorter words saved resources. Also, when running a program means handing a stack of punch cards to an operator and waiting for the result to come out the next day, saving a few seconds of typing probably wasn't a priority.

As computer got fast enough not to care about single bytes, there was a push against using shorter names. "be descriptive" they said. Also we had more advanced editors with copy-paste, search and replace, etc... If there was an objection for overly long variables, it was more about screen real estate than typing speed.

I'd say the case where it mattered would be interactive shells, UNIX shells in particular, because for DOS, commands were limited to 8 characters by the filesystem, another technical limitation. But then came completion, making typing speed not really an issue, but you still want to be able to fit your command in one line, because otherwise it is annoying.

So: technical limitation or readability rather than typing speed.

Yes, otherwise is more natural but less terse.

"or else" works too but that's still three extra characters

We often write "otherwise" in mathematics:

https://arxiv.org/html/1501.05438v2#:~:text=otherwise,-%2C

https://arxiv.org/html/1302.5008v3#:~:text=otherwise

https://arxiv.org/html/1501.05438v2#:~:text=otherwise,-%2E

In fact, I think that's the most common alternative, not "else".

"loop" can all be typed with one finger, as the letters are all together on the qwerty keyboard, and the "o" repeats itself.

"while" on qwerty is sort of a chore.

Using more fingers allows for faster typing.

There's a joke in here somewhere about machinists.

Usually for speed and avoiding strain you want to incorporate as many fingers as possible. In fact it's a common mark against dvorak online that "ls -l" is all typed with the right pinky (not an issue in the workman layout luckily).

Also remember this was typed with typewriters. That gives its own set of constraints. It's quicker to type two different characters than the same character twice in a row, as you need to wait for the typebar to return enough.

This is a good visual to understand it intuitively but your finger itself has a similar issue. In rhythm games like Taiko no Tatsujin and Muse Dash you only have two distinct notes/lanes but you typically play with 4 (or more) keys. A group of 3 red notes in Taiko is way easier to play by alternating hands back and forth than by spamming one key as fast as you can with the same finger. This somewhat applies to Rock Band as well with alternating strumming being useful for long stretches of notes close together, but a lot of people just brute force their way past that without learning alt strumming. For Taiko I think the alternating is much more important and you won't last without learning it.

w TAB in a properly configured emacs

Correct me if I'm wrong– I haven't check on THAT corpse– but couldn't you configure w TAB to be a shortcut for whatever you want (or make your own?).

When you can touch-type, it's better to have keys spread to use separate fingers. That way, you divide up the work. You have one finger still lifting while the other's already starting the next press.

Try it. What's faster to type: one word with a total of 5 distinct letters, or one word with a total of 4 letters, three being distinct?

I understand the theory when writing, you know: sentences. Writing code ain't that. I'm also not typing on a model M. This laptop's keys press down like 1 or 2mm at most. You actually only need to press down twice -- just move your finger from "l" to the "o" depress/press again for another "o" and move right over to the "p".

Do you reprogram your keyboard so parentheses, square/angle brackets, etc can be typed with their respective hands? Naw. When people type numbers all day, are they delighted to use the row of numbers up top, or a numpad? Never have I ever.

I use one finger when typing "loop", because it doesn't make sense to do otherwise given how the respective keys are on QWERTY. That just means the word "loop" sucks.

Regarding parentheses/brackets, I said "separate fingers", not "separate hands". I do use separate fingers for parentheses/brackets.

The numpad is a weird thing. When I've (rarely) needed it for sustained number capturing, I do typically stick to one finger because it's easy to get lost with multiple. Not sure why. It could just be lack of practice with the numpad.

For me, the "P" key is right at the split between zones. I probably (nearly?) always type "O" with my middle finger. But, the "P" is easily done with middle and ring fingers, and it seems like I may split the duty in many words.

It's hard to be sure, because I'm not sure how much I bias my movements by trying to monitor them while I do it! Normally I just type on auto-pilot, looking at the screen and not really being aware of the specific movements or finger duties...

I have a very idiosyncratic touch-typing method. I am self-taught with 40+ years of computer usage since grade school. There are arcing zones that are in the natural reach of different fingers, but with overlap where adjacent fingers can reach the same keys. I think my middle fingers are somewhat dominant, and may do more than their share of the total keypresses because of their dexterity and reach.

I have relatively large and flexible hands, so I span the keyboard by bending and reaching fingers rather than moving my forearms. The outer heel of my hands are statically parked on the palm rest or desk, and just the small joints in my hands and fingers are moving.

This parked posture is probably why I strongly prefer the Thinkpad "trackpoint" input device for general computer use.

What matters is the token count and logprob. It hurts but it's true

I'm writing some Crystal (which has Ruby-like syntax) and I'd add `unless` to the list. I like it!

"Unless" feels like adding come-from (next to goto) to a language. A statement/flow should not change its meaning after being declared/written IMHO.

edit: My criticism is for the suffix version to be clear. Unless / else is actually cool.

wdym? "unless" is literally "while not", no come-from mechanics

“unless” is “if not” — it is not generally looping construct.

`destroy_world() if $angry;` is Perl syntax. And Python has `destroy_word() if angry else live_long_and_prosper()`.

(But it's not remotely like come-from.)

P.S. in re the other response, "unless" is "if not". "until" is "while not".

`unless` came from Perl, Ruby adopted it, and so of course did Crystal.

”unless” already existed in early Lisps in the 1970s…

Also in BCPL from late 1960s

Reply on news.ycombinator.com