Yes, because AZERTY is more efficient than QWERTY for coding! That was my surprising discovery when I considered switching to QWERTY. That would have been a mistake.
#azerty4coding
I was searching for a thread of yours about Pure Pro silencing and red this.
That's really interesting, could you give more details about this?
OK, this is going to be off-topic, so let's keep it short.
I have done statistics using a large project of mine, a program written in C. I have used the source code of this project as a reference and counted every occurrence of every character.
I have then evaluated the efficiency of QWERTY and AZERTY, assuming that I have to type all this code again.
What I evaluate is the number of characters you can type in a row, in average, before you have to use a modifier (Shift or AltGr) to enter the next character.
On a full size QWERTY keyboard, you can type 13.5 characters in average before you need to use a modifier (it's always Shift).
On a full size AZERTY, you can type 28.1 characters in average, and then you have to use Shift or AltGr for the next character.
When you analyze the results, you can see that what is killing the performance of the QWERTY keyboard is the need to use Shift in order to type frequent characters like the parenthesis and the star.
NOTE: these are stats for a full size keyboard. For a TKL keyboard, AZERTY and QWERTY are almost equal in efficiency (or inefficiency). The loss in performance is mainly because you now need to use Shift to type "/", "0" and "1" on AZERTY. I did the stats because I was seriously considering switching to QWERTY. But as you can see, I would not have gained anything by doing so.
NOTE2: the results are flawed because I did not take into account the need to use Shift to enter capital letters. The penalty is the same whatever layout you use, so all it does is reduce the difference in efficiency between QWERTY and AZERTY. Even taking this into account, I still don't have anything to gain by switching to QWERTY.
