Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 16:04:11 +0200
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 at 15:51, Andrew Sutton via Ext
<ext_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> 2. I would probably prefer the inverse “splice” operation to then also be a unary operator (an alternative which is discussed at the bottom of the paper). Not only does having them both be unary ops make their inverse relationship clearer, but the “[: :]” is a bit too clumsy for me, have to press and release shift too many times, and so many dots in there it clutters things up a bit visually.
>
>
> On my keyboard, there is 1 more shifted character in [:expr:] than $expr and 1 less than $(expr).
AltGr+8 Shift+., compared to AltGr+4 and AltGr+4 Shift+8, so no huge
difference, on mine. Like all
sorts of programming-line-noise glyphs, the apparent clumsiness pretty
much goes away over time.
And sure, Finnish keyboard layouts are arguably clumsier than US
layouts, for programming.
<ext_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> 2. I would probably prefer the inverse “splice” operation to then also be a unary operator (an alternative which is discussed at the bottom of the paper). Not only does having them both be unary ops make their inverse relationship clearer, but the “[: :]” is a bit too clumsy for me, have to press and release shift too many times, and so many dots in there it clutters things up a bit visually.
>
>
> On my keyboard, there is 1 more shifted character in [:expr:] than $expr and 1 less than $(expr).
AltGr+8 Shift+., compared to AltGr+4 and AltGr+4 Shift+8, so no huge
difference, on mine. Like all
sorts of programming-line-noise glyphs, the apparent clumsiness pretty
much goes away over time.
And sure, Finnish keyboard layouts are arguably clumsier than US
layouts, for programming.
Received on 2021-02-16 08:04:27