Can you turn off Pipeline in ARM Cortex M3

Am 12.09.2015 um 14:34 schrieb David Brown:
> On 12/09/15 01:05, Hans-Bernhard Br�ker wrote:

>> Incidentally, this makes typing C source on non-US PC keyboards a royal
>> pain, particularly if you've mastered touch typing.  IMHO it qualifies
>> as a miracle that any working C code was ever written in Belgium or
>> Switzerland :-)
>
> You get used to it quickly - I found it a slight inconvenience for a few
> weeks when I moved to Norway, but not more than that.

I find it enough of one to have my German keyboard set to US layout for 
everything but writing actual German prose.  Drives colleagues crazy if 
they want to type something on my machine, too ;-).  In my student years 
I even used actual US keyboards both at home and on the university's 
machines.

At least on the German layout, the AltGr and {[]} are really in the 
worst position they could possibly have picked, from a touch typing 
point-of-view.  Given where AltGr is located, you can't really keep your 
right hand in home position; the thumb just won't go there.  And once 
the hand is up in the air, targeting along the row from 7890� to get 
{[]}\ is just too error-prone to be acceptable.  Typing those [] alone 
sometimes took longer than all the stuff that went in between them!

> It was actually
> not the {[]} symbols, that need the AltGr key on a Norwegian layout,
> that were the most annoying.  It is the shifted symbols above the number
> keys that are worst (at least when I now occasionally have to deal with
> a US or UK layout).

Absolutely.  Why on earth are the () Shift+8 and Shift+9 on a German 
layout, but Shift+9 and Shift+0 in US?

On 12.9.2015 г. 23:40, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> Am 12.09.2015 um 14:34 schrieb David Brown:
>> On 12/09/15 01:05, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
>
>>> Incidentally, this makes typing C source on non-US PC keyboards a royal
>>> pain, particularly if you've mastered touch typing.  IMHO it qualifies
>>> as a miracle that any working C code was ever written in Belgium or
>>> Switzerland :-)
>>
>> You get used to it quickly - I found it a slight inconvenience for a few
>> weeks when I moved to Norway, but not more than that.
>
> I find it enough of one to have my German keyboard set to US layout for
> everything but writing actual German prose.  Drives colleagues crazy if
> they want to type something on my machine, too ;-).  In my student years
> I even used actual US keyboards both at home and on the university's
> machines.
>
> At least on the German layout, the AltGr and {[]} are really in the
> worst position they could possibly have picked, from a touch typing
> point-of-view.  Given where AltGr is located, you can't really keep your
> right hand in home position; the thumb just won't go there.  And once
> the hand is up in the air, targeting along the row from 7890ß to get
> {[]}\ is just too error-prone to be acceptable.  Typing those [] alone
> sometimes took longer than all the stuff that went in between them!
>
>> It was actually
>> not the {[]} symbols, that need the AltGr key on a Norwegian layout,
>> that were the most annoying.  It is the shifted symbols above the number
>> keys that are worst (at least when I now occasionally have to deal with
>> a US or UK layout).
>
> Absolutely.  Why on earth are the () Shift+8 and Shift+9 on a German
> layout, but Shift+9 and Shift+0 in US?
>

On 12.9.2015 г. 23:40, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> Am 12.09.2015 um 14:34 schrieb David Brown:
>> On 12/09/15 01:05, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
>
>>> Incidentally, this makes typing C source on non-US PC keyboards a royal
>>> pain, particularly if you've mastered touch typing.  IMHO it qualifies
>>> as a miracle that any working C code was ever written in Belgium or
>>> Switzerland :-)
>>
>> You get used to it quickly - I found it a slight inconvenience for a few
>> weeks when I moved to Norway, but not more than that.
>
> I find it enough of one to have my German keyboard set to US layout for
> everything but writing actual German prose.  Drives colleagues crazy if
> they want to type something on my machine, too ;-).  In my student years
> I even used actual US keyboards both at home and on the university's
> machines.

During my years in Germany (20+years ago) I had a US layout keyboard.
When I had to use some of the PC-s at the company I had learned how
to switch off the German layout, was something like alt-f1 or
alt-ctrl-f2 (or completely different, I may have forgotten it
altogether).
The keys were coming to their normal places which was good enough for
me, although many did not correspond to the key caps... Obviously I
used these keyboards rarely and for short tasks. I never got used to
the German layout; and I think the French one is even worse.

Dimiter

(sorry for the null message I posted - was just beginning to write what
was supposed to be this one and inadvertently hit "send").

On 12/09/15 18:25, George Neuner wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 14:36:46 +0200, David Brown
> <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>
>> On 12/09/15 03:20, George Neuner wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder now if the keyboard was part of the reason that Pascal family
>>> languages remained popular in Europe much longer than they did in the
>>> US.
>>
>> No, that would have absolutely nothing to do with it.  It is not hard to
>> type {} on non-US keyboards - it is certainly quicker and shorter than
>> typing begin/end.  And despite the myth that many design decisions in C
>> were because of the terrible DEC keyboards used by K&R, such
>> considerations are totally insignificant in choosing a language.
>> (Except for APL, of course.)
>
> Source code is intended to be read by humans as well as by compilers.
> I use C because employers will pay me to do so, not because I
> particularly like it.  All of C's power [and then some] is available
> in languages that are safer to use and don't look so much like line
> noise.  That may not have been true in 1975  [though I could make a
> case that it was], but it certainly was true by 1985.
>
> George
>

That's fair enough as an argument.  There is plenty in C that I don't 
like.  To paraphrase Churchill, C is the worst of all programming 
languages - but it's the best we've got.

I just disagree with the theory that keyboard layouts had any say in the 
matter.

On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 22:40:45 +0200, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:

> Am 12.09.2015 um 14:34 schrieb David Brown:
>> On 12/09/15 01:05, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> 
>>> Incidentally, this makes typing C source on non-US PC keyboards a
>>> royal pain, particularly if you've mastered touch typing.  IMHO it
>>> qualifies as a miracle that any working C code was ever written in
>>> Belgium or Switzerland :-)
>>
>> You get used to it quickly - I found it a slight inconvenience for a
>> few weeks when I moved to Norway, but not more than that.
> 
> I find it enough of one to have my German keyboard set to US layout for
> everything but writing actual German prose.  Drives colleagues crazy if
> they want to type something on my machine, too ;-).  In my student years
> I even used actual US keyboards both at home and on the university's
> machines.
> 
> At least on the German layout, the AltGr and {[]} are really in the
> worst position they could possibly have picked, from a touch typing
> point-of-view.  Given where AltGr is located, you can't really keep your
> right hand in home position; the thumb just won't go there.  And once
> the hand is up in the air, targeting along the row from 7890ß to get
> {[]}\ is just too error-prone to be acceptable.  Typing those [] alone
> sometimes took longer than all the stuff that went in between them!
> 
>> It was actually not the {[]} symbols, that need the AltGr key on a
>> Norwegian layout, that were the most annoying.  It is the shifted
>> symbols above the number keys that are worst (at least when I now
>> occasionally have to deal with a US or UK layout).
> 
> Absolutely.  Why on earth are the () Shift+8 and Shift+9 on a German
> layout, but Shift+9 and Shift+0 in US?


Shift+8 and Shift-9 date back to earlier (19th century, Remington?) 
keyboard layouts, which in turn influenced ASCII.


Shift+9 and Shift-0 come from the IBM Selectric (early '60s).
According to this Wikipedia article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Selectric_typewriter
"This change was made because smaller characters hit the paper with less 
force, and consolidating smaller characters such as '" into a pair on a 
single key avoided needing to adjust the force based on shift state."


Regards,
Allan

On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 22:40:45 +0200, Hans-Bernhard Br�ker
<HBBroeker@t-online.de> wrote:


>Absolutely.  Why on earth are the () Shift+8 and Shift+9 on a German 
>layout, but Shift+9 and Shift+0 in US?


Tradition/history in both places.  I've seen typewriters from the
early 20th century from both countries with the 8/9 and 9/0 placement
of the parenthesis.  Of course those were not completely standardized,
so you can find exceptions for both.

Hans-Bernhard Br&#4294967295;ker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> writes:

> Incidentally, this makes typing C source on non-US PC keyboards a
> royal pain, particularly if you've mastered touch typing.  IMHO it
> qualifies as a miracle that any working C code was ever written in
> Belgium or Switzerland :-)

Conveniently Windows at least since XP installs the US keyboard layout
and has a quick key to switch layouts. People do tend to cling to the
various awful national layouts like a baby to a mother's teat but really
a proper layout is easily toggled into and back out of for when one
writes in their native language. Same thing in at least the bigger Linux
desktops.