Lost a new commercial user this week :(

[Wyatt via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 17 December 2014 at 15:15:41 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2014 15:01:30 +0000 Wyatt via Digitalmars-d
> <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> And yet they have much better organisation and they're much
>> _less noisy_.
> did you seen at least one template in winapi? and at least one
> constrained template?

Irrelevant to my point.

> it's easy to remove constraints from phobos dox.  guess what
> people will say then? "dox is awful, there are no clearly seend
> constraints there!"
>
Wooooah, hold up there, pal!  At no point has ANYONE advocated 
removing the constraints from the documentation entirely.  Could 
you please stop pretending that every suggestion for change 
involves a shift of extremes?

>> This is what we mean when we talk about "quality" in
>> documentation.  Hell, a lot of CPAN docs are easier to follow
>> than the Phobos stuff, and that's _Perl_ for crissakes!
> either i forgot something, or perl doesn't have templates too.
>
Again, this is irrelevant to the topic, which is "Phobos 
documentation is accurate but often somewhat unreadable, and 
that's a bad thing".  I made this point to reiterate that even a 
language reviled for being "write once; read never" often has 
clearer documentation.

>> Bull.  D isn't magic and expecting that people need to set
>> aside a chunk of time to "learn" it is really silly.
> i hope such people will never adopt D.
>
It's too late; we're already here.  With a niche language like 
this (I hate to admit it, but that's how it is) that's probably 
most of the people that pick it up.

>> But it's not as silly as the idea that you don't learn the
>> language by diving in.
> using the tools you never used before, without training, to
> solve production tasks. this is what seems to be silly for me.
>
And over here, in reality, not every situation is optimal and we 
often find ourselves doing just-in-time learning.  Learn how to 
learn by doing and accept that you're going to exercise that 
skill.  A lot.  If you need a bunch of training up front just to 
get things done, you're probably in the wrong field.

>>   You know, by using it (and the standard library) to solve a
>>   problem?  This is simply how people pick up new programming
>>   languages.
> so i'm not a human then.
>
Well duh, you're a unicorn.  Didn't you get the memo? ;)

> if people want to use reference documentation to learn the
> language, i myself prefer this people to use anything except D.
> and i bet that php is what they want.

And I'm sincerely glad this sentiment isn't prevalent in the 
community.  Leave that attitude with C++.

-Wyatt