Matthew Ong Wrote: > On 5/28/2011 3:02 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: > > Matthew Ong Wrote: > > > >> Perhaps format like coffee using more interesting side by side > >> comparison and with more writefln/writeln rather than assert. > >> Assert does not show anything visually. > > > > I understand this position and that new programers of D find it odd that > > examples don't have any output. However I have taking a liking to using > > assert as it documents what is expected and there is no need for a comment. > > On top of that it gets people familiar with assert and potentially using it > > in their own code and the icing is that unittests are built in the same > > manner (you should expect no output when everything is OK). > > > > In fact I have an introduction to programming book which uses just assert > > for most of the examples so far. > > > > http://nascent.freeshell.org/programming/D/LearningWithD.pdf > > Hi > > The I have seen partial format of your book. If you plan to sell it, > I am not too sure what in publishing direction and format you are heading.
Well, it is a possibility, but in this small attempt I've discovered that I suck at writing. I'll be working to make this complete, but it might be a very short book and it most certainly won't be perfect. If by format you mean the presentation, they yes I have no clue how to use LatEx. And if you mean organization, well it is missing a lot but I think my use of code samples, output, and explanation is pretty standard. > >> Assert does not show anything visually. > Perhaps some other asserts that can? I am sure it is not too difficult > for someone to make assert with writefln functions instead of purely > sprintf + assert? mixin could solve this easily. Right, but I'm not claiming that it should. > Yes. QA look for unit testing also. But they mostly just run to see if > the console output, with data in and data shown. Yes, QA/everyone likes to see a scree full of green boxes, I do not know if this adds value other than "Hey look we did something!" not saying that isn't good. One thing I do think is silly is making the Unittest run before the program, generally you either want to run tests or you want to run the program. > JUnit (Please see this, for D sake) > http://junit.sourceforge.net/javadoc/org/junit/Assert.html > BTW, is there something like JUnit API in D? I think there have been some of these. D's unittests are not meant to replace a Unit test framework, they are meant to be used. A thing that you can put anywhere and throw asserts into lowers entry barrier greatly. > Comprehensive > http://www.wrox.com/WileyCDA/WroxTitle/Ivor-Horton-s-Beginning-Java-2-JDK-5-Edition.productCd-0764568744,descCd-tableOfContents.html > Can be used for referencing once, you are middle ranged. Not too good > for CP1 or CP2. But CP3. > > Jump Start Format > http://www.informit.com/store/product.aspx?isbn=0672329433 > Easy self-learning with working example. > > Example Format > http://oreilly.com/catalog/9781565923713 > But other Oreilly, Lots of words, but little code. Yes, it is more > towards the experts field market. > > Well organised Book Publisher > http://www.packtpub.com/sites/default/files/sample_chapters/7726-ajax-and-php-sample-chapter-5-ajax-form-validation.pdf?utm_source=packtpub&utm_medium=free&utm_campaign=pdf > Best, learning by building working project sample. > Personally I like packtpub as their format help the reader to take note > of important things. Even with a glace, you can pick up good stuff that > works. > > Suggestion is to find out what type of book format people browse more in > a community library. I suspect it will be very different for asia, eu, > usa, japan, taiwan, south american. I think bearophile's observation is pretty accurate. This will be an experiment. I'm interested to find out if D can be taught in a manner that best suites D, and if others find my style to be interesting. > There is no book to cover it all in software development. Just book and > good reading that show people how to get stuff on the visual. That is > what get the client acceptance document signed and payment done for > project. That would be silly, I can't cover all of software development and I wouldn't want to. > I understand that D is trying to be correct 100% of the time. Not to pop > that bubble, it is proven to be impossible from historical track record > of mankind. Or else, why do we have unit testing/coding standards? If you aren't going to try for perfection you aren't going to get close. Thank you for the feedback, I'll have to save your links for later review.
