Timed Typing Test

test timed typing

I recently wrote a post on my blog about a Speed Typing Test which ended up being pretty popular with my readers, so thought I’d share it with you here.
I’ve been using computers ever since I got my first in the form of a Sinclair Spectrum 128k +2 back when I was 7, however the one regret I have is that I still cannot properly touch type, but how good am I currently?
Given all the years that I’ve been using computers, it has meant that I can type fairly quickly at a decent speed through a combination of using 4-6 fingers at a time and semi-looking at the keyboard – I kind of know whereabouts the keys are, but if I don’t look down at the keyboard while typing, most of the time I will make mistakes. Now that I am blogging regularly, being able to get my thoughts into type as quickly as possible would be a real advantage for me.
This is the first time that I’ve used a timed typing test online to give me an idea of my typing speed, but from what I saw from my 55wpm results and those of others, given my limiting factors of not being able to touch type, I got a decent score that I’m quite impressed by.
Obviously, like many tests, this timed typing test included, it’s not going to be perfect, but it certainly gives a good indication how good you are and gives encouragement to put the time in to learning to touch type which you can do by going to 10 Fast Fingers.
Woo hoo, I did 44. I think I was lucky.
I never knew how slow I could type until i took the test… I got 123 characters consisting of 25 correct words and no wrong words. Though, I was like looking at the keyboard most of the time! Beautiful one there!

connectedinternet.co.uk


Tags: , ,

This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 23rd, 2008 at 8:15 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

12 Responses to “Timed Typing Test”

  1. Nicole Says:

    Got my Digg!Pretty cool, text is different every time, Screenshot of it in action:http://images6.theimagehosting.com/inacion.JPG (on my laptop:P)

  2. Ora Says:

    When I took typing class the fastest I got was about 80 gwam.The average fastest speed was in the 60’s

  3. Peronel Says:

    smalltalk doesnt need refactoring tools. its not a language like java or C# where the developer fucks it up the first time and so has to go back and fix their mistakes. when youre a smalltalk developer youre doing it right the first time. so you basically just write your code, it works, and you move on.

  4. Cherie Says:

    That’s assuming that they terminate at all.

  5. Bryanne Says:

    I double space after each sentence, which marks it as an error. But it was pretty accurate for the short length of text it uses.

  6. Lynnette Says:

    58wpm, 6 mistakes…one hand, bitches.

  7. Lonnie Says:

    90 WPM (words per minute). Zero mistakes.

  8. Russel Says:

    i am sorry, your sentence doesn’t parse.you are utterly and completely confused.look here:template <int N>struct linal_vec { std::vector<double> _v; linal_vec() { _v.resize(N); } linal_vec<N> operator*(const linal_vec<N>& a) { return …; }};int main(int argc, char** argv) { linal_vec<3> v3_1; linal_vec<3> v3_2; // This compiles. v3_2 = v3_1 * v3_1; // This gives a compiler error. linal_vec<4> v4; linal_vec<3> vErr = v3_2 * v4; return 0;}there, that’s dependent typing for you.it’s fully static, yes; but that doesn’t make it any less dependent.heck, g++ even gives me a real error message:foo2.cc: In function ‘int main(int, char**)’:foo2.cc:31: error: no match for ‘operator*’ in ‘v3_2 * v4′foo2.cc:12: note: candidates are: linal_vec<N> linal_vec<N>::operator*(const linal_vec<N>&) [with int N = 3]permalinkparentcontinue this threadqwe1234 (5 children) [+]qwe1234 -1 points 8 days ago [-]of course it doesn’t, as it shouldn’t.types are something that happens at compile time.go read a book yourself, moron.in fact, what you tried to write has nothing to do with typing at all.

  9. Jessye Says:

    W00t 97 wpm 0 mistakes. Anyway, pretty neat-O.

  10. Dorinda Says:

    108 wpm.. 1 mistake…

  11. Lakeshia Says:

    A more accurate title would be “Thinking that Java, C and C++ are strong static type systems, and drawing inaccurate conclusions based on such”.