On Friday, 29 November 2013 at 16:15:10 UTC, Chris wrote:
I agree that D, too, can be a bit confusing. I sometimes have
problems with AA declarations.
Example:
string[string][string] hm; // What am I?
But I don't think it's the reading direction.
Actually it is. D is pretty good about being consistently read
backwards (which, as you can tell, is a tiny bit awkward, hence
why I think "the other way" is better).
hm is an associative array mapping string to another associative
array mapping string to string.
Pseudocode:
hm [string][string]string;
How about something *ridiculous* in right-to-left reading:
rofl *[string][]*bool;
Try to read that before seeing what's below:
-----
rofl is a pointer to an associative array mapping strings to
arrays of pointers to bools. Very simple and very intuitive.
After reading a few things like that you become very comfortable
with it.
I wonder why you would want the variable name first.
It's really irrelevant either way, but it "reads out loud" much
better in my experience
For my liking Go code looks too cluttered (pointing out the
obvious). But I guess it's just the way you're "brought up"
with a language. Maybe I'm a dinosaur.
I'm not suggesting Go got it perfectly. I've seen a lot of
languages that have cleaner declarations, IMO. To be honest, Go
looks kind of cluttered in my eyes too. But the right-to-left
reading order is something I'm a very strong proponent of. I'm
fine with D, however, since you can usually reliably read it
backwards. C, however, is a horrific mess.
