D vs Java as a first programming language

[dsimcha]

== Quote from Christopher Wright (dhasenan at gmail.com)'s article
> Sean Kelly wrote:
> > The typical approach to this tends to be "just put this stuff in the
> > file and ignore it--I'll explain it later.  I never understood why this
> > is considered a good teaching method :-)
> Because it lets you create toys without understanding, and thus gets you
> interested without you expending significant effort.

Agreed, though I wouldn't necessarily phrase it in a way that smacks of
intellectual laziness.  Personally, I've always felt that I learn much more
quickly and much more thoroughly when I get to try to do something (preferably
useful) with my new knowledge as I'm learning, even if my understanding is fairly
shaky, rather than being forced to learn all the minutiae/background/theory before
trying to use any of what I've learned.  For example, I would *never* read a book
about a new programming language cover to cover before trying to write something
in it.  I would probably skim the first chapter or two, try to do a project in it,
use the book as a reference, and then read the book cover to cover later to learn
some better ways of doing things after I'd gotten my hands dirty a little.

I feel that once I've actually tried to use a new piece of knowledge, I have a
*much* better idea of what, specifically, I still don't get, and can ask much more
intelligent questions than if I'm forced to learn large amounts of stuff passively
from lectures/books before getting my hands dirty with any of it.  Furthermore,
learning this way also makes it much easier for me to see how things fit into the
bigger picture.  Not sure if this is universal, or just a personal preference.