

Is QWERTY harming language design? - comatose_kid
http://www.oreillynet.com/ruby/blog/2008/05/is_qwerty_harming_language_des.html

======
michael_dorfman
First of all, it's clear that the article is not talking about the QWERTY
layout per se, but the character set on the keyboard-- switching to Dvorak
would do nothing to improve the situation described.

Second, it's odd that he doesn't bring up the experience of APL, the only
language that I know of that tried to break out of the traditional character
set. Aficionados find it concise and elegant; personally, I find it cryptic. I
fear the same might occur with other attempts in this vein.

------
smanek
I don't think QWERTY is actually harming language design - designers simply
implement multiple-character operators (like ==). (however, I certainly agree
it's awkward and extended symbol operators would be cleaner).

Also, as the author mentioned, I don't think it's really feasible to get all
coders to agree on one 'coder keyboard' layout (hell - we've had 50 years to
decide on an optimal editor and are no closer than when we started).

I think the best solution is to continue with this multi-char symbol syntax,
but to have keyboards with programmable _centrally placed_ macro keys that can
be automatically redefined by the current application. For example, when
coding lisp I'd love to have dedicated paren keys, and maybe even a dedicated
'setf', 'defun', and 'let' keys.

I think that as OLED keyboards ala the Optimus Maximus become more
economically feasible and widespread over the next decade or two, this is
exactly what will happen. Then, in 20-30 years when these keyboards become
ubiquitous, language designers will start to implement non-ascii operators
that can be mapped to the programmable keys.

It will certainly be prettier - but I don't think it will herald in a new era
of better languages.

------
jrockway
Perl6 has Unicode operators, both built-in and available to be defined by the
user.

However, syntax is highly overrated. '() is more than enough.

------
Hexstream
I'd favor blank keyboards outright, at least until we have those keyboards
with fancy screens embedded in them, and even then.

1\. I hardly ever typed on a keyboard where the labels on the keys
corresponded to the actual current logical keyboard layout. There are so many
potential issues, maybe you're typing canadian french on a US keyboard, maybe
you're typing Dvorak, maybe you're typing special characters, maybe you're
typing some foreign language, maybe you're typing in emacs with your special
keybindings.

2\. Looking at the keyboard while typing is a great way to type slow and
inaccurately, and maybe even have neck pain if you're lucky. And you can't see
what you're typing on the screen. Learning touchtyping takes just a couple
days (and motivation!) and is a great investment.

And an extensive keyboard macro system embedded right in the OS would be
great!

------
scott_s
For a clear example of what the author is talking about, check out slides
30-34 of a 2006 PLDI presentation on Fortress:
[http://research.sun.com/projects/plrg/PLDITutorialSlides9Jun...](http://research.sun.com/projects/plrg/PLDITutorialSlides9Jun2006.pdf)

------
nertzy
For what it's worth, Ruby methods can be named using Unicode characters:

[http://www.oreillynet.com/ruby/blog/2007/10/fun_with_unicode...](http://www.oreillynet.com/ruby/blog/2007/10/fun_with_unicode_1.html)

------
Zak
I don't think a syntax with a whole bunch more sigils, punctuation and the
like would be an improvement in language design. Of course, I've always been
more of an oatmeal and toenail clippings guy than a line-noise guy.

------
tokipin
how do programs in, say, japanese look? do they use japanese symbols as
variables etc?

~~~
donw
Look at Ruby. The guy who came up with it is a researcher at Osaka university;
English is definitely not his native language.

Computers tend to use English for a number of reasons, some practical, but
mostly historical. In this particular case, the practical reason involves the
lack of a good, concise, 'if-then-else' structure in the Japanese language.
Sure, the idea can be expressed, but it isn't really a common construct in
everyday life.

------
kogir
This is feasible because no real programmers use consumer laptops ;)

------
iamelgringo
No, the QWERTY keyboard is harming my wrists. :)

------
0x28aa1f185a6b4
That UK keyboard layout sure is!

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keyboard_layout#UK_and_Ireland>

Why have you moved all of my symbols around?

