There is a great shortcut Shift+R for object mode which repeats the last action. Is there something similar for edit mode?
Usage example:
I select a group of vertices and rotate them in a certain way. After that I select another group of vertices and rotate them in the same way. And so I repeat many times.
Is there a way to speed up such operations?
The same thing should work, I use it all the time. Take the default cube, go into edit mode, top view (ortho).
Go to edit mode, select all faces, g y 5 to move it “up”, with everything still selected, set your pivot point to the 3d cursor.
Then Shift+d r 60 and the cube should duplicate and rotate 60 degs. Now Shift+R 4 times and you have a circular array. Note though, if you hit CR after the Shift+d, then do the rotate, only the rotate is duplicated.
Also, F3 pulls up the history and you can reselct anything from that. Then the next time you use Shift+r, it will use that action.
Number shortcut also works with repeat history menu. If the thing you do requires two operations and want to repeat them, you could hit F3 and number 2 over and over again. If it requires, 3, could hit F3 and 3.
It’s still relatively fast as you can mindlessly push those two repeatedly without thinking too much. But it does mean many keypresses. More than that, might want to rethink the workflow 
Did not know this, stored in the old noggin for future reference.
Seems that in Blender 2.8 it doesn’t work this way. In this case it’s repeat only one operation but not both. Or maybe I do something wrong. Anyway, thanks for the tip!
Anyone know if repeat last is still broken in regards to custom transforms?
Some bug always changed the axis setting to normal instead of the user defined one, so it was borked in that regard. Never got addressed the few times it was brought up in 2.7x updates… Maybe some 2.8x build will fix that? (Now I just need a computer that would run it.)
Now I’m curious if the repeat history mentioned by JA12 would get around that? (Is setting the transforms considered an extra action?) Despite the seemingly low priority the problem was given, that work-around isn’t exactly obvious nor was it mentioned at the time.