On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 02:21 -0500, House, Jason J. wrote: > On the down side, I noticed a significant lack of documentation and > difficult to find get it at my fingertips.
Yes, I had this problem too - you do have to do a lot of digging to figure out some things. I actually had quite a bit of trouble figuring out how to write to files - it's actually simple but very poorly documented and I had to browse the groups and go through the libraries. You would see posts where others were frustrated by these simple things. But I chalked this up to the learning curve. This happened to me in C years ago when I learned it. The author of D has also written C++ and C compilers. I feel that he has addressed most of the problems of C, I'm not much of an expert on C++ but I assumed that he addressed those too. It's difficult going from a language you are really comfortable with to have to learn to do things a different way. I've programmed in so many languages I don't really question the differences too much - I just say, "oh, you can't do it that way in this language." Having said that, I was a heavy user of bit fields in structs and that has been taken out. That was not a "warty" feature, it was a feature that prevented errors in my opinion (now I have to write possibly buggy code to unpack them." So I see D as not perfect by any means, just "better." I'm looking more at what was added, not removed. If only the optimizer was better I would be a full convert. - Don _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
