• fedvasu (26/26) Sep 18 2013 I a noob at D, I am an intermediate java programmer, I am
• Peter Alexander (3/5) Sep 18 2013 Absolutely. Of course, you need to get the big things right too,

"fedvasu" <vadie.misc gmail.com> writes:

I a noob at D, I am an intermediate java programmer, I am 
learning C++ for my next project(employment). I knew about D, I 
always felt like D is "C++: The good parts(TM) without tooling". 
I dabbled a bit in D (a few project euler problems,nothing major) 
DMD and LDC work flawlessly on fedora (good job maintainers! very 
much appreciated).

I am casually browsing Ali Cehrli's book in my free time.Thanks 
Ali for a decent resource.
(First post so please tolerate the thank yous and me toos)

Coming to the point.

I read this article by Walter 
(http://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/uniform-function-call-syntax/232700394)

I think it is way awesome, I mean seriously I am one of the 
(junior)maintainers for a large codebase(>2 million SLOC java) 
for our customer. I was like can't we just have a few static 
functions in a class and could use them as if they are methods of 
our class?(atleast for new classes we create) We have a crap load 
of fat classes and boy I have a headache when I have to peek into 
10000+ SLOC classes,lot of repetition.

I even liked the article more when Walter mentions STL's approach 
(Algorithms + Iterators + Containers) and clearly stated why 
extension methods are inferior to UFCS (more boiler-plate and 
call syntax restrictions).

I think small things like this add upto a lot for long term 
maintainability of application software.

I am more intrigued about D than before!

"Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:

Always good to hear positive feedback about D :-)

 I think small things like this add upto a lot for long term 
 maintainability of application software.

Absolutely. Of course, you need to get the big things right too, 
but the small things make it all so much more bearable.