What's your wpm (typing speed)?
If I'm really lucky I get 100 worlds per minute (https://play.typeracer.com/), otherwise I think I'm around 60-70wpms on average.
I use a regular QWERTY. Anybody here using cool keyboards?
I use a regular QWERTY. Anybody here using cool keyboards?
I got 35 wpm on my second attempt and 51 wpm on my third. I also QWERTY. I could probably go a bit faster if I tried a few more times but I know that I'm not a fast typist so I don't think I could compete with you guys.
I took the test three times. I got 80, 82, and 82 WPM respectively, typing normally. If I try to type any faster than that, my accuracy suffers and my WPM rate drops.
I just QWERTY on an average laptop keyboard.
I just QWERTY on an average laptop keyboard.
Depends on what I'm typing.
Words like "program" and "interface" appear faster than I can think, probably about a billion WPM.
Everything else is somewhere around 80 WPM.
Hmm, according to https://www.typingtest.com/test.html, I get 84 WPM on random text. Not bad.
For years and years I couldn't make the standard 41 WPM required by employers looking for data entry and receptionists... LOL.
I don’t know when it changed.
Words like "program" and "interface" appear faster than I can think, probably about a billion WPM.
Everything else is somewhere around 80 WPM.
Hmm, according to https://www.typingtest.com/test.html, I get 84 WPM on random text. Not bad.
For years and years I couldn't make the standard 41 WPM required by employers looking for data entry and receptionists... LOL.
I don’t know when it changed.
Huh. I just got ~55 WPM. I was sure I was somewhere around 30-40. I guess like Duthomhas I must have improved at some point in the past without realizing it.
There are some jobs where typing speed matter, but for the most part I think people put way to much value on it. Especially when it comes to programming.
For a while I had a temp job at National Refrigerants (http://www.refrigerants.com), which normal people have probably never heard of, but if you work with industrial HVAC or the like you probably do business with them.
My job was to type analysis reports into an MS Access database program that would then be reviewed for correctness and sent back to the customer.
So if the customer sent us some oil sampled from a refrigeration unit on top of your local Wal-mart, we would test it and send back an Oil Analysis Report. Or if the customer sent in actual refrigerant for testing, we would return an appropriate Refrigerant Analysis Report.
Each report had a field for notes and recommendations for the technician. The wording has a fairly standardized format, and very large initialisms were common — it saved the man in the big chair from wasting his time writing out very long stuff over and over. So what I got from him was something like the following fairly standard report's recommendations (handwritten, of course):
From that apparent gibberish I had to produce a report that read like this at the bottom:
Despite being a fairly good touch-typist, I thought that if I needed carpal-tunnel to start early, this was a boring way to do it.
So I did what any good hacker would do — I wrote a program.
With said program I could type in the initialisms almost verbatim* and get a perfectly-punctuated and perfectly-spelled report producing about 70% less carpal tunnel. And the number reports that wound up back on my desk, while low to begin with, dropped to almost zero, and then only for minor modifications and not spelling fixes and the like.
*The program was still in development when my job terminated, so there were still a few corner cases that could have been improved, but weren't worth my time to dink with. Also, a single space was all that was necessary between lines...LOL.
Personally, I think the program itself is pretty slick. Most of it was fairly general and could be applied to any similar situation. Though it did have some specialization for easily inputting and formatting long lists of refrigerants and percentages and a few other things like that.
[edit]
Oh yeah, it was also smart enough to recognize a sequence, and often I didn’t even have to type out the entire initialism, just the letters where similar sequences diverged. I’ll bump that CT savings up to about 75% or so. :O)
[/edit]
I think I’m the only who cares, though. If I were to give it to them it could put the current data entry specialist out of a job... and since there are maybe five other people on the planet with a similar job, that wouldn’t be very nice...
Anywho... that’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it!
For a while I had a temp job at National Refrigerants (http://www.refrigerants.com), which normal people have probably never heard of, but if you work with industrial HVAC or the like you probably do business with them.
My job was to type analysis reports into an MS Access database program that would then be reviewed for correctness and sent back to the customer.
So if the customer sent us some oil sampled from a refrigeration unit on top of your local Wal-mart, we would test it and send back an Oil Analysis Report. Or if the customer sent in actual refrigerant for testing, we would return an appropriate Refrigerant Analysis Report.
Each report had a field for notes and recommendations for the technician. The wording has a fairly standardized format, and very large initialisms were common — it saved the man in the big chair from wasting his time writing out very long stuff over and over. So what I got from him was something like the following fairly standard report's recommendations (handwritten, of course):
ISSSIA DTE oil Mobil DTE Medium. P, S, Zn PALA Cu PAALBC AOATRSGQIS DTE oil AINSP RANSMI . |
From that apparent gibberish I had to produce a report that read like this at the bottom:
Infrared spectrum shows sample is a DTE oil Mobil DTE Medium. Phosphorus, sulfur, and zinc present as lubricant additives. Copper present at a level below concern. All other above test results show good quality in-service DTE oil and indicate normal system performance. Resample at next scheduled maintenance interval. |
Despite being a fairly good touch-typist, I thought that if I needed carpal-tunnel to start early, this was a boring way to do it.
So I did what any good hacker would do — I wrote a program.
With said program I could type in the initialisms almost verbatim* and get a perfectly-punctuated and perfectly-spelled report producing about 70% less carpal tunnel. And the number reports that wound up back on my desk, while low to begin with, dropped to almost zero, and then only for minor modifications and not spelling fixes and the like.
*The program was still in development when my job terminated, so there were still a few corner cases that could have been improved, but weren't worth my time to dink with. Also, a single space was all that was necessary between lines...LOL.
Personally, I think the program itself is pretty slick. Most of it was fairly general and could be applied to any similar situation. Though it did have some specialization for easily inputting and formatting long lists of refrigerants and percentages and a few other things like that.
[edit]
Oh yeah, it was also smart enough to recognize a sequence, and often I didn’t even have to type out the entire initialism, just the letters where similar sequences diverged. I’ll bump that CT savings up to about 75% or so. :O)
[/edit]
I think I’m the only who cares, though. If I were to give it to them it could put the current data entry specialist out of a job... and since there are maybe five other people on the planet with a similar job, that wouldn’t be very nice...
Anywho... that’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it!
Last edited on
Cool Duthomhas.
And it's true that we're bound to type what we're familiar to faster. Similarly if it's something in your thoughts then you would type it faster than what you have to type from screen (or so I have observed with myself).
Don't take for granted that Programming != English
.'. Somebody needs to write a program to generate programs that the user must type. And this shall give you your actual worlds per minute in terms of writing C++ code. I think it'll be cool.
Let's make this a forum thing. Ye experts can make this dream a real thing. I think that'll be sickk. If nobody is interested I'll make this my own little project (might take two months but worth it).
And we'll have something like this thread:http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/beginner/28855/
where everybody posts their scores.
Anybody got ideas?
-> Firstly where do we get the programs? We canz't type all of them in manually (1) because that's tedious (2) because the user would get used to it. So we have to rely on already existing programs maybe?
(if it came to me then I would just copy-paste programs becuz I donno how to webscrape and certainly not with C++)
Maybe we can scrape https://github.com/trending/c++, and try to find a .cpp file that has a function with less than 20 lines.
Might be a little complex. Somebody who knows webscraping might be able to do that.
-> Itz not necessary but maybe we could make a foolproof system to verify that the user's result is a real one by having a token or something display next to the user's result, and the token also has a link to the result. So we could put the token inside some complex mathematical function and verify.
This is not necessary. And probably very hard, also because the source code would be right in front of the user. But would it be possible? It would be really cool.
And it's true that we're bound to type what we're familiar to faster. Similarly if it's something in your thoughts then you would type it faster than what you have to type from screen (or so I have observed with myself).
Don't take for granted that Programming != English
.'. Somebody needs to write a program to generate programs that the user must type. And this shall give you your actual worlds per minute in terms of writing C++ code. I think it'll be cool.
Let's make this a forum thing. Ye experts can make this dream a real thing. I think that'll be sickk. If nobody is interested I'll make this my own little project (might take two months but worth it).
And we'll have something like this thread:http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/beginner/28855/
where everybody posts their scores.
Anybody got ideas?
-> Firstly where do we get the programs? We canz't type all of them in manually (1) because that's tedious (2) because the user would get used to it. So we have to rely on already existing programs maybe?
(if it came to me then I would just copy-paste programs becuz I donno how to webscrape and certainly not with C++)
Maybe we can scrape https://github.com/trending/c++, and try to find a .cpp file that has a function with less than 20 lines.
Might be a little complex. Somebody who knows webscraping might be able to do that.
-> Itz not necessary but maybe we could make a foolproof system to verify that the user's result is a real one by having a token or something display next to the user's result, and the token also has a link to the result. So we could put the token inside some complex mathematical function and verify.
This is not necessary. And probably very hard, also because the source code would be right in front of the user. But would it be possible? It would be really cool.
But like how do we identify a function? Anybody got a better idea? Maybe not have to search for a function maybe we can just paste random 20 lines from a random .cpp/.h
Anybody got ideas for the token generating part? We'll juzt obfuscate the part of the code that has to do with generating a token. If somebody wants to unobfuscate it then they have way too much time and they deserve to lie.
Anybody got ideas for the token generating part? We'll juzt obfuscate the part of the code that has to do with generating a token. If somebody wants to unobfuscate it then they have way too much time and they deserve to lie.
Last edited on
This is where I disagree about typing speed while programming. More time should be spent thinking about a problem than properly typing it up.
Though the thinking may also include typing, I don’t think it reasonable to consider that part of typing code.
As an example, a recent user has an assignment to create a recursive insertion sort (http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/general/249922/).
Said user has been busy typing away, trying to figure out recursion. I made a fairly large post about thinking about transforming a loop into a recursive function call, then broke it down into steps, refining the problem statement with code snippets along the way.
I don’t think typing speed has any meaningful value during this exercise — the whole thing is about thinking — figuring out and understanding the problem, breaking it down, and building a solution.
This takes significantly longer than any typing would, even for very slow typists.
Only when a final solution is crafted (in the mind and in crude pieces on paper or pixels) will the majority of the issue become typing it up neatly. And even then you will need to review the final thing to make sure you didn’t introduce logical errors.
Programming is slow.
IMHO, fast programmers are those that are either making a lot of mistakes or busy plagiarizing other code (and still making mistakes).
Though the thinking may also include typing, I don’t think it reasonable to consider that part of typing code.
As an example, a recent user has an assignment to create a recursive insertion sort (http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/general/249922/).
Said user has been busy typing away, trying to figure out recursion. I made a fairly large post about thinking about transforming a loop into a recursive function call, then broke it down into steps, refining the problem statement with code snippets along the way.
I don’t think typing speed has any meaningful value during this exercise — the whole thing is about thinking — figuring out and understanding the problem, breaking it down, and building a solution.
This takes significantly longer than any typing would, even for very slow typists.
Only when a final solution is crafted (in the mind and in crude pieces on paper or pixels) will the majority of the issue become typing it up neatly. And even then you will need to review the final thing to make sure you didn’t introduce logical errors.
Programming is slow.
IMHO, fast programmers are those that are either making a lot of mistakes or busy plagiarizing other code (and still making mistakes).
I've only found two situations where I was keyboard-bound:
1. It was repetitive code that for some reason I could not turn into a loop. An easy example I can think of is declaring fixed-length C arrays in structs for C# interop. C# has no way to declare a fixed-length array that's allocated in the struct that references it.
2. It was something that I had a perfectly clear idea of how to do. For example, code for some of the questions here.
Otherwise, yeah, typing speed is completely irrelevant for programming. The irrelevance goes up tenfold if you include time spent debugging.
It may be useful in other areas of software development, though. Such as to write documentation (although even then I often spent a lot of time thinking how to phrase things accurately and clearly), or when communicating with others.
1. It was repetitive code that for some reason I could not turn into a loop. An easy example I can think of is declaring fixed-length C arrays in structs for C# interop. C# has no way to declare a fixed-length array that's allocated in the struct that references it.
2. It was something that I had a perfectly clear idea of how to do. For example, code for some of the questions here.
Otherwise, yeah, typing speed is completely irrelevant for programming. The irrelevance goes up tenfold if you include time spent debugging.
It may be useful in other areas of software development, though. Such as to write documentation (although even then I often spent a lot of time thinking how to phrase things accurately and clearly), or when communicating with others.
closed account (E0p9LyTq)
When typing code how fast or slow I type has close to no effect. Only when I am typing something that doesn't require a much thought does typing speed matter. And then I am fast enough to keep up a flow and slow enough to not make too many typing mistakes.
Composing this post required a bit of thought so my speed at typing really didn't matter.
Composing this post required a bit of thought so my speed at typing really didn't matter.
Yeah, those of use with years of experience can usually jump into common sub-problems faster. Often I'll want some useful table of information to validate a formula or something, so I'll just type up a quick < 50 LOC program to do it for me. Simple stuff.
Most of the answers I put on the forum are also off the top of my head. But I often make tiny mistakes in code when doing that.. so if it is anything that should get the "Edit and Run" button, I'll make sure that it actually compiles and works properly... which often takes as much time as it did to type it up off the top of my head.
I've honestly never spent much time playing with a debugger. I know people swear by them, but the "poor man/woman's" debug method often does it good enough for me, because I know what I'm looking for at each step through an algorithm, it is easy enough to section it out into a few printf/cout/writeln/ShowMessage/puts/whatever statements.
Different ways of looking at the same thing. I'm old (fart) school, I guess.
But yeah, stepping through an algorithm takes extra time when I goofed it up somewhere.
Meh, I find that I have the same experience as you. So much documentation today looks like this:
Waste of time to seek, access, and read. My documentation tells me what I'm quuxing for, and how n makes a difference, and anything else future me might want to know, since quuxing is typically a fairly complicated process...
Most of the answers I put on the forum are also off the top of my head. But I often make tiny mistakes in code when doing that.. so if it is anything that should get the "Edit and Run" button, I'll make sure that it actually compiles and works properly... which often takes as much time as it did to type it up off the top of my head.
| For example, code for |
I've honestly never spent much time playing with a debugger. I know people swear by them, but the "poor man/woman's" debug method often does it good enough for me, because I know what I'm looking for at each step through an algorithm, it is easy enough to section it out into a few printf/cout/writeln/ShowMessage/puts/whatever statements.
Different ways of looking at the same thing. I'm old (fart) school, I guess.
But yeah, stepping through an algorithm takes extra time when I goofed it up somewhere.
| It may be useful ... [writing] documentation... |
Meh, I find that I have the same experience as you. So much documentation today looks like this:
|
procedure TAwesome.Quux( n: integer ); Performs a Quuxing. |
Waste of time to seek, access, and read. My documentation tells me what I'm quuxing for, and how n makes a difference, and anything else future me might want to know, since quuxing is typically a fairly complicated process...
| I've honestly never spent much time playing with a debugger. |
| But yeah, stepping through an algorithm takes extra time when I goofed it up somewhere. |
I think the real power of debuggers comes from the ability to inspect objects, memory, registers, etc.
And stuff like data and conditional breakpoints breakpoints are less often useful, but can be lifesavers.
| So much documentation today looks like this |
I feel a lot of libraries excessively break down their workflows and/or don't have enough convenience functions for the most common use cases; a lot of user code ends up looking like
|
|
|
|
But this isn't about evaluating the talent of a person. It's a game, like how typing speed was with English sentences.
Turns out people who type quickly are ones who've spent a lot of time typing similar stuff before (take for example texting). And you can ask somebody who's really good at typing English sentences quickly to type code, and if he hasn't coded before then he will probably cry because of the weird syntaxes.
Once you're familiar with typing code, you tend to type code faster. Think about the first time you wrote code, were you able to locate your braces {} without glancing your keyboard like you can now? Were you able to find that pound # symbol without glancing your keyboard? But you can now. I'm not saying that typing speed must be used to judge a person.
For that matter most games are about how quick a person can react, but that doesn't mean somebody who is bad at the game doesn't have a quick thinking ability or reaction capabilities. The truth is, everybody has that, it's just about how familiar your brain is with a given environment.
Anyways I think this will be a cool project which I hope to do in the future if I have time.
Anybody who hasn't contributed to the subject of the thread, please feel free to contribute, sorry for changing the topic.
Turns out people who type quickly are ones who've spent a lot of time typing similar stuff before (take for example texting). And you can ask somebody who's really good at typing English sentences quickly to type code, and if he hasn't coded before then he will probably cry because of the weird syntaxes.
Once you're familiar with typing code, you tend to type code faster. Think about the first time you wrote code, were you able to locate your braces {} without glancing your keyboard like you can now? Were you able to find that pound # symbol without glancing your keyboard? But you can now. I'm not saying that typing speed must be used to judge a person.
For that matter most games are about how quick a person can react, but that doesn't mean somebody who is bad at the game doesn't have a quick thinking ability or reaction capabilities. The truth is, everybody has that, it's just about how familiar your brain is with a given environment.
Anyways I think this will be a cool project which I hope to do in the future if I have time.
Anybody who hasn't contributed to the subject of the thread, please feel free to contribute, sorry for changing the topic.
I'm getting not more than 40 no matter how hard I try, that might be the result of 20 per cent smaller keys on my thinkpad x-series, too many mistypes.
Yeah, that was me for years. I don’t even know what happened or when it changed.
And, even though I can take a test that says 84 WPM, I typically type much more slowly —probably between 40 and 50 WPM.
Advice: don’t worry about it. Unless your job specifically depends on it, it doesn’t matter. I know people who own successful businesses built on computer technology (like payroll processing) who hunt-and-peck type with their index fingers, and they’re doing just fine.
And, even though I can take a test that says 84 WPM, I typically type much more slowly —probably between 40 and 50 WPM.
Advice: don’t worry about it. Unless your job specifically depends on it, it doesn’t matter. I know people who own successful businesses built on computer technology (like payroll processing) who hunt-and-peck type with their index fingers, and they’re doing just fine.
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.