Typing isn't the major cost of having lots of extra characters. The cost of having lots of extra characters is the separation of concepts from one another in the code. The closer the important parts are to one another, the easier it is to scan the code looking for defects or to make updates.
It isn't the mechanics of typing, it's the entire paradigm. Why would I need to use Arabic characters in some sort of pseudo-English to represent what I wanted the computer to do? Why not spoken words? Or emotional nuances?
Not trying to go way off the deep end, but I think people make a big mistake when they say that since we have a printed code situation now we'll always have one. I'm already seeing a lot of graphical programming environments. Sure -- they suck to some degree. But each year they suck less and less. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to believe that fairly soon a lot of programming could be done graphically. I would think a spoken conversation, with the computer rapidly prototyping, executing, and testing the concepts as we discussed them, could create some very complex solutions. It's not about typing or the mechanics -- it's the paradigm that's outdated.
