How One Programmer Is Coding Faster By Voice Than Keyboard

mikejuk writes "Is it possible that we have been wasting our time typing programs. Could voice recognition, with a little help from an invented spoken language, be the solution we didn't know we needed? About two years ago Tavis Rudd, developed a bad case of RSI caused by typing lots of code using Emacs. It was so severe that he couldn't code. As he puts it: 'Desperate, I tried voice recognition'. The Dragon Naturally Speaking system used by Rudd supported standard language quite well, but it wasn't adapted to program editing commands. The solution was to use a Python speech extension, DragonFly, to program custom commands. OK, so far so good, but ... the commands weren't quite what you might have expected. Instead of English words for commands he used short vocalizations — you have to hear it to believe it. Now programming sounds like a conversation with R2D2. The advantage is that it is faster and the recognition is easier — it also sounds very cool and very techie. it is claimed that the system is faster than typing. So much so that it is still in use after the RSI cleared up."

This is like the corded keyboard

[Required Snark]

The mouse/keyboard combination was not the original combination envisioned by Douglas Englebart, the inventor of the mouse. He paired it with a chorded keyboard [wikipedia.org] that could be operated with one hand. Clearly text input with one hand and mouse input with the other is a better input paradigm, but it is still not in use much today.

This use of speech recognition seems like a similar situation. It works for a few people, but it will not ever have a large user community. QWERTY keyboards are so dominant that their network effect makes other input modes irrelevant. Even those who adopt it will still be using conventional keyboards away from their custom environment.

Re:Coding != Typing

[buchner.johannes]

In the talk he says open source voice recognition software, e.g. Sphinx, don't work at all, and you have to go for Dragon.
But then creates writes his own command language.

So I don't understand why do we need voice recognition software that recognizes English? All we need is a open source package that translates sounds into some phonetic dictionary (e.g. IPA), and from there the second problem is to translate that into a native language.

Or even simpler, give it a dictionary of commands, and get it to find the closest match, or if all are unlikely, do nothing.

Why try to go for something so hard, but there is no software for the simpler problem that would make people very productive by just commanding the computer?

Re:Input is not the limiter when coding

[Kjella]

You beat me to it. I can type in code pretty damned fast - Fast enough that people frequently ask me how often I go through keyboards - Fast enough that I've actually had people in the room with me ask if I had just typed something meaningful or merely mashed keys for the hell of it - And, while coding, I tend to spend far, far more time thinking than coding. Someone watching me program for an hour would see 3-5 minutes at a time of complete inactivity, followed by assaulting the keyboard for a 30 second burst, rinse wash repeat.

I think I can have considerably longer buffer/burst cycles, the challenge is keeping the big picture in your head while doing the little parts, and there I feel the duration of the bursts matter. If I've figured that to solve a business problem I need to change code sections A2, B4, C3 and D1 I'll start working on A2 and if it's quick and easy I won't forget the rest while if I struggle and need to churn out a lot of boilerplate by the time I'm done I might not remember what those other changes were. Either you then have to take notes or pseudocode the whole solution first or recreate it from memory, in those cases faster input would help keep me "in the flow", even though the input itself is only a small fraction of the wall time.

Not shocking

[quantaman]

Not a fan of evolutionary psychology, but I think there's a lot of reason to think we do have an aptitude for spoken language. I wouldn't be at all surprised if a well designed voice system left more mental focus available for the task of coding.

I'm not sure if the technology is there yet, and you still don't want to hear your officemates jabbering away, but I could see the theoretical usability of a spoken word interface surpassing that of typing.