Lost a new commercial user this week :(

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d]

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:13:33 +1000
Manu via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> >> One thing I know for sure, is when they are confronted with
> >> constraints, especially on templates, they have absolutely no idea
> >> what they're looking at...
> > did they ever tried to learn the language? seems that you just throwed
> > phobos dox at them and expecting them to use that dox to learn D.
> 
> I never threw phobos docs at them, they found that themselves. I was
> actually kinda trying to steer them away from those docs in some
> cases, by insisting they hack on the code while I was in the room...

so no proper training at all? now it's completely clear why D was
dismissed.

> > D is not C. D is not C++. one must learn it before using it. and phobos
> > documentation is not for learning the language, it's reference for
> > phobos.
> 
> I can safely say I never 'learned D' by your definition.
> I brute forced my way with nothing more than the phobos reference, and
> the parallel language reference.

are you writing the commercial production code in D at the same time?
experimenting is ok when you have limitless bugdet and/or no deadlines.
i love D and i was trying to gently push D in our workflow, but i never
thinking about doing that without training. i would fire myself if i'll
try to do that.

> A senior C/C++ programmer should DEFINITELY be able to learn D by osmosis.
...in his free time, doing pet projects and be dedicated to that. and
yet C++ templates are so bad that one has to forgot nearly everything
he knows in that field before going to D templates. and using D without
templates is like running with your legs tied together.

> > i bet the story was like this: "guys, look at this cool language, it's
> > almost like C++, and has some great features! let's use it!" "ah,
> > almost like C++? so we don't have to learn? great, let's do it! but...
> > hey... what do all that gibberish in documentation mean? i've never
> > seen that is C++... screw it, this wannabe C++ language is awful!"
> 
> Don't be insulting.
> C++ programmers know exactly how bad C++ is. We've been discussing D's
> alternative approaches to common C++ problems for months, many hours
> wasted in front of the white board discussing the differences between
> the languages.
> They had a *lot* of background conversation to work with, much more
> than I had when I learned D.

i'm sorry. it's not about personal insulting or "C++ style of thinking",
it's about the directions. D IS NOT C/C++. i can't stress that harder.
expecting good C++ programmer to become good D programmer without proper
training (or alot of time spent doing pet projects in D) is simply
asking for troubles and frustration.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20141218/b0e5644c/attachment.sig>