-
IBM model M, dvorak. Nothing special.
-
IBM model M, dvorak.
The most hipster of combination.
-
I have a Unicomp model M-like keyboard, but with a dvorak layout. Love it.
But… My favorite has to be a TypeMatrix 2030 USB, with a black US dvorak sleeve (the image below is a UK layout, but it doesn’t differ that much) Took less time to get used to than I thought, even with the Enter key in the center of the keyboard, and for me this thing just wins wins hands down.
http://www.typematrix.com/shop/images/products/2030-skin-045-b-uk-dvorak-860x360.png
-
Pfft–not even Colemak or Norman? Everyone has heard of Dvorak these days.
-
-
Well at least @God has good taste in keyboards too.
I use Das Keyboard (a model M derivative) at work and at home. Cherry blue switches, O-rings to limit bottom out impact and noise. I’m now on my 4th Das and have no intent to switch it up anytime soon. On the go I have a Leopold II (also cherry blues and o-rings). At home and mobile I use a gifiti wrist rest, workspace allowing. Only downside is that the wrist rests get seriously chewed up by watch clasps.
-
-
I used a HHKB Pro2 for a while, as well as the Lite version, and now I’m back to my Model M. Still my favourite keyboard of all time. And at this point, I’ve lost count of how many I’ve tried.
Oh, and the main reason I’m back to using it is my office is now sufficiently far away from the bedroom so my wife can actually sleep when I’m typing.
-
-
-
This page might be useful for those of you who already know OCaml: Reason and OCaml: A quick reference for OCaml Programmers
-
-
Most of them are quite nice. Re-appropriating
=for mutable field changes instead of equality is pretty stupid, and replacingmatchwithswitchis silly, but whatever. Overall the greater consistency is a win; I remember being very frustrated with OCaml trying to guess where I needed to keep spamming more parens to get the parser to understand what I meant. -
-
OCaml already has a second syntax aimed at ironning out the kinks in the original - the so-called “revised syntax”. http://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-camlp4/manual007.html
The general consensus seems to be that while revised syntax is a little better, having two different syntaxes isn’t worth the gains. Seems like this fragmentation will be similar.
That being said, ML would be a great language choice for many programmers/tasks. I’m thrilled to see it in wider use.
-
-
-
While I think this is an important issue, I found the headline hyperbolic.
-
Great post! This isn’t explained well/often enough.
-
I’m not sure how helpful this blog post is. However that course looks good. I highly recommend anyone who has never tried functional programming to take it. Will be hard/weird at first. Not like Ruby where the first hour is a breeze. However once you grok the basics you’ll be sad to go back to your daily driver. OCaml made me a better programmer!
-
This is a breath of fresh air. A lot of the software I use should already be “done” by now. This should be a goal. Notepad/nano should not need updates.
I have the same feeling about plenty of textbooks. e.g. If you couldn’t explain calculus properly the first ten times, what makes you think you can on the eleventh?!
https://web.archive.org/web/20171106123257/http://blog.z3bra.org/2014/11/avoid-workspaces.html