Re: The top three big problems: Better Speech Reading

  • From: "Marlon Brandão de Sousa" <splyt.lists@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 12:27:17 -0300

That's not controversial, in fact it might be of use to people in some
situations. I like to hear semicolon because at the same time I am
listening to code I am concentrated im understanding what that code
does and such punctioation says me "hey, guy, remember that what's
comming next is another statement" ..
But it has to be optional and turned off by default because it is
modifying the way the language is presented and this is dangerous in
the seense that it will say a pretty different thing than what it is
really written.
If one chooses this presentation mode, they should know they're seeing
something which is already pre interpreted for them, not the real

2007/10/14, Veli-Pekka Tätilä <vtatila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi Marlon,
> I quite understand your point of view. And certainly this should be
> optional and I would never have a new programmer start out with all the
> convenience, so having this as an optional extra would be the way to do
> it, seeing that it is language specific anyway. But think the situation
> in which you know the syntax.
> If you had someone read code over the phone or in an audio book, would
> you have him or her read every parenthesis and every darn semicolon,
> even those that are always part of the language syntax e.g. the boolean
> expression in the if clause or empty parens in a method taking no
> argument? Personally I hate the amount of redundancy, and if there's a
> way to read code smarter, I'll definitely take that for browsing code.
> My point is that when I think of code I think ok we multiply x and y
> divided by z. I don't think:
> x star y slash z.
> which is an artifact of the language syntax.
> But again, I do realize this is controvertial and open to debate.
> And even as a proponent of this system, I'd say that I would have to try
> it out first to see how well it could be made to work and how much
> easier and briefer it would make reading code. Certainly, I could agree
> on reding conventions with sighted folks, but getting them in an elegant
> programmatically executable form might be non-trivial. Your words of
> warning are appreciated.
> --
> With kind regards Veli-Pekka Tätilä (vtatila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
> Accessibility, game music, synthesizers and programming:
> Marlon Brandão de Sousa wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > I think this is dangerous. I personally would not like to have a
> > solution set this way, but I will give a hint which is not dependant
> > on my personal preferenses.
> > If you set reading this way, a new programmer would have trouble
> > learning sintax. I won't discuss if this is or isn't good, but such
> > aproach would be modifying the way the programming language is
> > presented to the blind person. A sigted person will see a * sign, a
> > blind would hear a multipily word.
> > This kind of tools HAVE TO BE OPTIONAL, one have tthe right of reading
> > the same thing a sighted person is seeing.
> > Note that every other suggestions I gave doesn't modify the way the
> > language is presented, as the suggestions of Velipeca do.
> > Tools that will make navegation equivalent for blinds and sighted
> > people can be implemented, tools that will arbitrarely modify the way
> > the programming language are presented SHOULD be implemented at
> > maximum as a set of optional tools, and not be turned on by default.
> > Marlon
> >
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //

When you say "I wrote a program that crashed Windows," people just
stare at you blankly and say "Hey, I got those with the system, for
Linus Torvalds
View the list's information and change your settings at

Other related posts: