On Tuesday, 2 February 2016 at 16:41:54 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
Sure, but - as this post illustrates - there are clearly sections of the spec that could have their explanations improved.
It's sorta why i don't refer to the spec to see how the language currently works, and instead refer to the D book that's the baseline for the D2 standard; even if it's incredibly out of date. Too much of the spec from when i glanced at it felt like i was reading a lexx/yacc definition, which is a total turn-off.
