Hi,

From what I can see,...

The documentation seems to be making something simple harder to understand with lots of noises added. It is scattered all over the places. Many information Seem like a lot of dark/unwritten known by only a few persons.

1) There is No clear organizations. Associated to the syntax being describe. Like: what is the default encapsulation access modifier for class/struct/interface/enum/template/mixin/... where are they documented? There might be more similar broken/implied.

2) When describing a concept with syntax there most if not all example uses foo/bar and not work/payment? (If you get the sideline grin) Doing some sort of Neural Linguistic Programming to 'suggest' dumping someone down? If documentation trying to make a fool out of readers so that they 'appear' to be experts? Or documentation are there to help developer code better. Forum is available, I am grateful for the people that has kindly shown me around with sample code.

3) Is not making a new language purpose to make ease the developer mind so that they can be free to think about how to model business logic rather than be busy trying to figure out what is that strange thing for?

4) Not much working example in the html documentaions and not centralise. Only code fragments, with lots of foo & bar again...

Yes. I have seen:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/tutorials/wiki/ArraysCategory
http://www.dprogramming.com/tutorial.php

Plenty more I would expect...

True mastery is to make the complex model easy to understand not not
simple one to be complex to understand.

The best type of tutorial and documentation format I have seen so far
and yet simple to understand are shown here.

http://www.w3schools.com/php/php_operators.asp

They designed it in a way that those poor junior developer can copy and paste and still have a working program.

D might consider seriously and carefully how to rework the

Yes. That URL is better than Java tutorial documentation.

Yes, I am ranting. With good reasons. Hopefully for the best of D.

--
Matthew Ong
email: [email protected]

Reply via email to