On Sunday, 14 December 2014 at 08:37:36 UTC, Manu via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
They then made HUGE noises about the quality of documentation.
The
prevailing opinion was that the D docs, in the eyes of a
not-a-D-expert, are basically unreadable to them. The formatting
didn't help, there's a lot of noise and a lack of structure in
the
documentation's presentation that makes it hard to see the
information
through the layout and noise. As senior software engineers, they
basically expected that they should be able to read and
understand the
docs, even if they don't really know the language, after all,
"what is
the point of documentation if not to teach the language..."
I tend to agree, I find that I can learn most languages to a
basic
level by skimming the docs, but the D docs are an anomaly in
this way;
it seems you have to already know D to be able to understand it
effectively. They didn't know javascript either, but skimming
the
node.js docs they got the job done in an hour or so, after
having
wasted *2 days* trying to force their way through the various
frictions presented but their initial experience with D.
Comparing node.js to D? You probably speak about vibe, not D?
One of the take-away quotes I think, was "D seems to be a
language for
people who actively want to go and look for it, and take the
time to
learn it. That's never going to be a commercial success."
O_O Huh? Your team really didn't learn C++?
