Re: Great SWT Program
- From: twerpinator@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 21:18:45 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 7, 4:38 pm, blm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <blm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Unstated because uncontroversial and true. I've yet to see a keyboard
where any key took a different amount of a) force or b) vertical
travel to activate, except where the key in question was physically
broken or the keyboard was some weird nonstandard usually-easily-
avoided variety.
[lengthy and elaborate paragraph snipped; upshot: I'm a liar]
I am not. None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about
me are at all true.
"io"?
Error: Sentence fragment of unclear meaning.
Isolated, uncapitalized proper noun on a line by itself.
Jupiter's moons are clearly not relevant here anyway.
It all averages out in the wash anyway.
No idea what you're trying to say here. My claim is [something
irrelevant to the main point, which was that 2N > N when N > 0,
a mathematically irrefutable fact].
Time to hit a key may vary based on what key preceded it, but given a
constant pattern of input (e.g. English prose, or Java code, or
whatever) and enough time it should average out to a fixed value. If
that value is x > 0, and N > 0, then 2Nx > Nx and fewer keystrokes is
(on average) better.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Great SWT Program
- From: blmblm
- Re: Great SWT Program
- References:
- Re: Great SWT Program
- From: twerpinator
- Re: Great SWT Program
- From: blmblm
- Re: Great SWT Program
- From: bbound
- Re: Great SWT Program
- From: blmblm
- Re: Great SWT Program
- Prev by Date: Re: Great SWT Program
- Next by Date: Re: Great SWT Program
- Previous by thread: Re: Great SWT Program
- Next by thread: Re: Great SWT Program
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|