On 02/04/2011 10:15 AM, Don wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 2/3/11 7:56 PM, BLS wrote:
I got more and more the feeling that the D2 monster was made just for
ranges. The smart and elegant D1 design is definitely dead an gone. I
think I am not the only one who would prefer a D1 plus instead of D2.
bjoern
All in all it's fair to say that if you hate ranges you're going to dislike
D2, and there's little that can be done about that.
Yes, but...
I think we really, really, need to work on making Phobos less daunting.
Right now, we have most of the functionality. But some things are unnecessarily
complicated -- some are historical, some are workarounds for compiler bugs
(many of which are now fixed), some are rough edges in the language definition
which could probably be fixed.
We don't have many examples; many discussions and explanations assume too much
familiarity with terminology and concepts from functional programming
languages; and probably most importantly, we don't have tutorials.
All these things can and will be fixed. But right now, the learning curve is
horrible, and it's a major turnoff for people.
I do agree.
Would like to help on some of those points (eg tutorials, howtos, examples, and
generally rewriting docs so that they do not assume familiarity fith FP /and/
with 99% of C++): but those points raised by Don, precisely, prevent me from
getting a knowledge of D2 the language good enough to even dare thinking at
such contributions. Nice clercle ;-)
Denis
--
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com
