I'm very happy I attended an optional touch type class in high-school (on typewriters, actually). My recommendation for kids would probably be to learn to touch type, on a better layout (eg dvorak, colemak, workman).
Either way, proper touch typing is more than typing fast, it's also about "sustainable typing": posture, strain, reducing rsi - as well as being free to copy (read text to type in, not having to look at the keyboard or the screen where typed text is displayed).
I've not met many people that proper touch type, even programmers. Even if being able to copy a page of example code from a magazine/book is a useful skill.
Absolutely. I learned touch typing on my own during my O'Levels years when I bumped into a DOS-based touch typing tutor. It changed the way I looked at computers.
Ergonomic typing is usually part of the touchtyping class. At least when I was in school 30 odd years ago. I think it was obligatory for everyone but can't remember any grades. Most didn't bother though. (Sweden)
I've worked with a number of engineers in Europe who couldn't type without looking at the keyboard. I assumed that it's not part of every school curriculum there. Or maybe they learned and then went back to hunt-and-peck afterwards.
Is there a lot of variability in international keyboard layouts? I'd expect the base 26 letters + digits to be pretty consistent, but in countries with a lot of accented or alternate characters I could see touch typing being less attractive as a student.
Anyone. I didn't learn to touch type and I'm about as fast as a touchtypist. Indeed, my typing speed went down when I started learning and because I didn't finish, hasn't really recovered since. 99% of programming is thinking and structuring though, so touch-typing isn't all that useful.
I looked at the PDF paper and the results and I don't agree with the conclusions being drawn. The main issue I see from cursory skim is that the 30 participants had a range of typing speeds from 34-79 WPM. I don't consider these individuals typing specialists or professionals based on the low WPM. Now if you consider professionals where they have a requirement of something like 90+ WPM, then I think you are going to see very few people who are not touch typists because it'd be very difficult or maybe even impossible to reach those WPM without touch typing.
I think a better conclusion to draw from the study is that touch typing isn't as useful for the lower end of the WPM spectrum. For example, if you are typing at 50 WPM, touch typing vs non-touch typing isn't going to make too much of a difference. The fastest typists in the world though are touch typists.
> 99% of programming is thinking and structuring though, so touch-typing isn't all that useful.
I don't think typing speed is the biggest factor in productivity in programming, but I think you are downplaying it too much. Effective use of keyboard shortcuts, using vim, and having a high WPM typing speed has noticeably increased my productivity.
> then I think you are going to see very few people who are not touch typists because it'd be very difficult or maybe even impossible to reach those WPM without touch typing.
Anecdata, but: I got ~160 WPM without learning touch typing. I was a regular computer user from the age of 12.
...what? What kind of error-rate? How long could you sustain that? How'd you manage that speed having to glance between source and keyboard?
I'm pretty sure I was the fastest in my high school typing class (because I already knew how to type very well by then) and at my best I could stay a little over 100wpm for a minute or two without any errors, but it was hard. I could maybe get up around 120-130 transcribing speech and letting minor errors slip though. I doubt I get much over 90wpm at my best these days but it's still fast enough to draw the occasional "whoa!" from people watching me. 160 seems... crazy if you're not touch typing, and way above normal even if you are.
[EDIT] sorry about the tone, I'm not saying you're lying, that's just... wow. Crazy fast. Must have really surprised some people, haha.
> ...what? What kind of error-rate? How long could you sustain that? How'd you manage that speed having to glance between source and keyboard?
I'm not sure what kind of error rate. Currently without complete formal training (I did the first stage of Mavis Beacon maybe twice about 6 years ago), I'm at probably 90WPM and I can write without glancing between source and keyboard (Actually, something I like doing is typing while looking directly at someone else. It creeps them out :^) ).
It was weird because the incomplete formal training has actually increased my error rate, I'm using more fingers than I originally did (originally I used maybe 2 - 3 at most) but different fingers like to "step-in" now, which makes it more difficult. It doesn't help that I've switched between QWERTY and workman's layout several times (I can never seem to get the vim bindings nice :c).
Not to mention that when assessing the productivity of information workers, you must also consider the vastly faster feedback loop of seeing what you're typing on the screen in real time, rather than typing in bursts then looking back up in the stream.
I wonder what it is with hacker news and the inability of people on it to understand simple dramatic exaggeration.
A more realistic estimate would be something like 40%. When I choose to, I write C or Erlang, so there is generally not much boilerplate needed in making things go. I would say 60% of my work is architectural stuff. How things should be designed, named, structured. What parts should plug into what, what functions and set of systems of POSIX to use, what makes most sense for future reading, etc.
Everything. Touchtyping is just not a focus in school any more. Teachers look funny at you when you ask when the kids start touchtyping. They are expected to figure it out themselves. Very funny.
Most autocomplete functions just confuses my fingers and I end up either deleting and retyping, missing a character somewhere or I type faster than the slow autocomplete can fetch data... The linux prompt for autocomplete path and filenames are usefull though.
