www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - Packt is looking for someone to author a "Learning D"

reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
I got an email from the publisher of my D Cookbook asking me to 
write another book on D. From their email:

"We have recently commissioned a book on D, titled ' Learning D 
'. This book will have approximately 400 pages and and the vision 
behind this book is to introduce practical concepts and tasks 
specific to D programming."


I had to say no; I just don't have that kind of time right now. 
However, they asked me to ask here if anyone would be interested. 
If you are, email me and I'll get you more information and put 
you in contact with the Packt editors.
Feb 14 2015
next sibling parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce writes:
On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 16:25 +0000, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce=
 wrote:
 I got an email from the publisher of my D Cookbook asking me to=20
 write another book on D. From their email:
=20
 "We have recently commissioned a book on D, titled ' Learning D '.=20
 This book will have approximately 400 pages and and the vision=20
 behind this book is to introduce practical concepts and tasks=20
 specific to D programming."
Uurrr=E2=80=A6 I guess they have redefined the term "commissioned". I would= =20 have said "they have permission to commission/contract".
 I had to say no; I just don't have that kind of time right now.=20
 However, they asked me to ask here if anyone would be interested. If=20
 you are, email me and I'll get you more information and put you in=20
 contact with the Packt editors.
What is their workflow these days? When they asked me to do a Python=20 book and later a Groovy/GPars one, they were tied to a Word-based=20 workflow for authors. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Feb 14 2015
parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 16:51:20 UTC, Russel Winder 
wrote:
 I would have said "they have permission to commission/contract".
yeah, me too, but I know what they meant.
 What is their workflow these days?
idk if it has changed in the last year, but mine was done on MS Word as well. They provide a template then you follow it and give them the .doc. The editors then give back the .doc with comments attached.
Feb 14 2015
parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce writes:
On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 16:54 +0000, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce=
 wrote:

 idk if it has changed in the last year, but mine was done on MS Word=20
 as well. They provide a template then you follow it and give them=20
 the .doc. The editors then give back the .doc with comments attached.
s/Word/LibreOffice/, I do not have Windows, let alone Word. The core problem with the workflow, is that it assumes the author is=20 only there to provide content and has no say in any other aspect of=20 the book. As someone more used to providing press PDF this is=20 irritating. However I could get over it, if the workflow involved a=20 source I can put into version control. Obviously XeLaTeX is the=20 correct medium, but AsciiDoc is acceptable as a second best. Any=20 suggestion of DocBook/XML as authored source is generally met with=20 derision, especially given there is AsciiDoc. I have to admit, doing a Go or D book, is kind of appealing.=20 Technically I am supposed to be doing "Python for Rookies, 2e" but it=20 isn't happening for reasons I would rather not let the NSA know about. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Feb 14 2015
next sibling parent reply "Vladimir Panteleev" <vladimir thecybershadow.net> writes:
On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 17:04:24 UTC, Russel Winder 
wrote:
 Obviously XeLaTeX is the
 correct medium, but AsciiDoc is acceptable as a second best.
During the editing of the Russian translation of TDPL, I've worked in MS Word as well. Probably its main advantage is its collaboration tools: you can see who added or deleted which parts, and toggle between visible edits and final text easily. You can also add comments to a text range; by passing the document along, this made possible even short conversations. What would be the equivalent of such collaboration in a non-MS-Word-based workflow?
Feb 14 2015
next sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/14/15 10:15 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 17:04:24 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
 Obviously XeLaTeX is the
 correct medium, but AsciiDoc is acceptable as a second best.
During the editing of the Russian translation of TDPL, I've worked in MS Word as well. Probably its main advantage is its collaboration tools: you can see who added or deleted which parts, and toggle between visible edits and final text easily. You can also add comments to a text range; by passing the document along, this made possible even short conversations. What would be the equivalent of such collaboration in a non-MS-Word-based workflow?
Adobe offers commentary tools for PDFs. -- Andrei
Feb 14 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Craig Dillabaugh" <craig.dillabaugh gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 18:15:09 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 17:04:24 UTC, Russel Winder 
 wrote:
 Obviously XeLaTeX is the
 correct medium, but AsciiDoc is acceptable as a second best.
During the editing of the Russian translation of TDPL, I've worked in MS Word as well. Probably its main advantage is its collaboration tools: you can see who added or deleted which parts, and toggle between visible edits and final text easily. You can also add comments to a text range; by passing the document along, this made possible even short conversations. What would be the equivalent of such collaboration in a non-MS-Word-based workflow?
Well, if you do the document with Latex on git (or some similar version control), you get most of the same stuff. Latex has a comment tool where you can do margin comments if you wish, and of course you can also do comments in the 'code' if you want - they don't show up in the document at all. Heck, I am sure there is a package for everything in Latex if you look hard enough. A MS-word document with 'track changes' on, edited by multiple people, is the greatest eyesore known to humanity. I still don't understand why anyone who had a choice between Latex and MS-Word would pick MS-Word for anything longer than 25 pages... Just my personal opinion as one who recently finished a 200 page thesis in Latex, and is now working for a company where we do all our internal documents in Word. Latex certainly has its ugly warts, but it is so nice for lengthy document1.
Feb 14 2015
next sibling parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce writes:
On Sun, 2015-02-15 at 04:38 +0000, Craig Dillabaugh via Digitalmars-d-annou=
nce wrote:
 [=E2=80=A6]
 Well, if you do the document with Latex on git (or some similar=20
 version control), you get most of the same stuff.  Latex has a=20
 comment tool where you can do margin comments if you wish, and of=20
 course you can also do comments in the 'code' if you want - they=20
 don't show up in the document at all.  Heck, I am sure there is a=20
 package for everything in Latex if you look hard enough.
(Xe|Lua)LaTeX or AsciiDoc Git or Mercurial or Bazaar Publishers have, however, seemed to have decided that sub-editors must=20 work on the original source document files directly. If this is an=20 integral part of the publisher workflow and the sub-editors cannot=20 deal with DVCS or the markup languages, then the publishers refuse to=20 use those tools. Still as long as some half-way decent authors are prepared to use Word=20 and abdicate their responsibility for the content once initially=20 created, the publishers win.
 A MS-word document with 'track changes' on, edited by multiple=20
 people, is the greatest eyesore known to humanity. I still don't=20
 understand why anyone who had a choice between Latex and MS-Word=20
 would pick MS-Word for anything longer than 25 pages...
And who has the current master version, which file is the master,=20 etc., etc.
 Just my personal opinion as one who recently finished a 200 page=20
 thesis in Latex, and is now working for a company where we do all=20
 our internal documents in Word. Latex certainly has its ugly
 warts,
 but it is so nice for lengthy document1.
Luxury. I typed my thesis (including the maths equations) using a=20 broken portable manual typewriter. ;-) --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Feb 15 2015
parent reply "Craig Dillabaugh" <craig.dillabaugh gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 15 February 2015 at 11:36:22 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
 On Sun, 2015-02-15 at 04:38 +0000, Craig Dillabaugh via 
 Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
 […]
 Well, if you do the document with Latex on git (or some 
 similar version control), you get most of the same stuff.  
 Latex has a comment tool where you can do margin comments if 
 you wish, and of course you can also do comments in the 'code' 
 if you want - they don't show up in the document at all.  
 Heck, I am sure there is a package for everything in Latex if 
 you look hard enough.
(Xe|Lua)LaTeX or AsciiDoc Git or Mercurial or Bazaar Publishers have, however, seemed to have decided that sub-editors must work on the original source document files directly. If this is an integral part of the publisher workflow and the sub-editors cannot deal with DVCS or the markup languages, then the publishers refuse to use those tools. Still as long as some half-way decent authors are prepared to use Word and abdicate their responsibility for the content once initially created, the publishers win.
 A MS-word document with 'track changes' on, edited by multiple 
 people, is the greatest eyesore known to humanity. I still 
 don't understand why anyone who had a choice between Latex and 
 MS-Word would pick MS-Word for anything longer than 25 pages...
And who has the current master version, which file is the master, etc., etc.
 Just my personal opinion as one who recently finished a 200 
 page thesis in Latex, and is now working for a company where 
 we do all our internal documents in Word. Latex certainly has 
 its ugly
 warts,
 but it is so nice for lengthy document1.
Luxury. I typed my thesis (including the maths equations) using a broken portable manual typewriter. ;-)
And you tell new students these days, and they won't believe you :o) One other nice thing about LateX is that since you prepare your content in a text editor, it lets you focus on your content and not be distracted by fiddling with formatting as you go! In theory you should do the same in MS-Word, but its sometimes hard to focus with all the pretty buttons :o) Of course, TeX is also a programming language, so for developer types it does present its own distraction. Luckly TeX coding is so obtuse it is never a serious temptation.
Feb 15 2015
next sibling parent Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce writes:
On Sun, 2015-02-15 at 15:37 +0000, Craig Dillabaugh via Digitalmars-d-annou=
nce wrote:
 On Sunday, 15 February 2015 at 11:36:22 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
=20
[=E2=80=A6]
 Luxury. I typed my thesis (including the maths equations) using a
 broken portable manual typewriter. ;-)
=20 And you tell new students these days, and they won't believe you :o)
There is one wonderful upside to this story, the examiners appreciated=20 the complexity associated with changing anything, that they took=20 considerable effort to find the minimum changes necessary that could=20 be done with Snopake and a pen.
 [=E2=80=A6]
 Of course, TeX is also a programming language, so for developer types
 it does present its own distraction.  Luckly TeX coding is so obtuse
 it is never a serious temptation.
Uuuurrr=E2=80=A6 like m4, once you get into it it isn't so bad. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Feb 15 2015
prev sibling parent Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce writes:
On 15 February 2015 at 17:56, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce
<digitalmars-d-announce puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Sun, 2015-02-15 at 15:37 +0000, Craig Dillabaugh via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
 On Sunday, 15 February 2015 at 11:36:22 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:

[…]
 Luxury. I typed my thesis (including the maths equations) using a
 broken portable manual typewriter. ;-)
And you tell new students these days, and they won't believe you :o)
There is one wonderful upside to this story, the examiners appreciated the complexity associated with changing anything, that they took considerable effort to find the minimum changes necessary that could be done with Snopake and a pen.
 […]
 Of course, TeX is also a programming language, so for developer types
 it does present its own distraction.  Luckly TeX coding is so obtuse
 it is never a serious temptation.
Uuuurrr… like m4, once you get into it it isn't so bad.
Hmm, yeah. Depends on the application use of m4 though. I've been at a company who used m4 to generate all their DNS zone files. In which you'd get high marks for having a way to add/remove records that was relatively low maintenance cost, but low marks for complexity of adding features/debugging bugs in the wiry maze of macros. :) Iain.
Feb 15 2015
prev sibling parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Sunday, 15 February 2015 at 04:38:08 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh 
wrote:
 Just my personal opinion as one who recently finished a 200 page
 thesis in Latex, and is now working for a company where we do 
 all
 our internal documents in Word. Latex certainly has its ugly 
 warts,
 but it is so nice for lengthy document1.
Isn't latex for document restyling? What you would use it for? There's little time to only write the text, let alone fiddling with styles and typesetting. Word is better in this sense that it gets the end result just by saving the document.
Feb 18 2015
parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce writes:
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 09:56 +0000, Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
[=E2=80=A6]
 Isn't latex for document restyling? What you would use it for?=20
 There's little time to only write the text, let alone fiddling=20
 with styles and typesetting. Word is better in this sense that it=20
 gets the end result just by saving the document.
(Xe|Lua)LaTeX (or LaTeX 3) is an authoring tool, but then using the same source form it becomes a typesetting tool. No need to change the tools to change the role. LaTeX (and AsciiDoc) files are mergeable and hence can be stored in a VCS repository very easily. Word files are just binary blobs. Perhaps for individual working there is a "who cares" possibility, but for joint authoring a VCS repository provides a shared, managed store. VCS and binary blobs are a waste of time, so if you author with binary blobs you can't really do joint authoring, unless you impose sequential access. I have tried using a wrapper around FrameMaker files to achieve locking, technology works, authoring process sucks. Think using SCCS or RCS.=20 --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Feb 18 2015
parent "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
Well, Word can diff and merge documents, though, it works with 
sharepoint, not vcs.
Feb 18 2015
prev sibling parent Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce writes:
On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 18:15 +0000, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-ann=
ounce wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 17:04:24 UTC, Russel Winder
 wrote:
 Obviously XeLaTeX is the
 correct medium, but AsciiDoc is acceptable as a second best.
=20 During the editing of the Russian translation of TDPL, I've worked in MS Word as well. Probably its main advantage is its=20 collaboration tools: you can see who added or deleted which parts, and toggle between visible edits and final text easily. You=20 can also add comments to a text range; by passing the document along, this made possible even short conversations. =20 What would be the equivalent of such collaboration in a non-MS-Word- based workflow?
Git, Mercurial, Bazaar, =E2=80=A6 --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Feb 15 2015
prev sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/14/15 9:04 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
 On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 16:54 +0000, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:

 idk if it has changed in the last year, but mine was done on MS Word
 as well. They provide a template then you follow it and give them
 the .doc. The editors then give back the .doc with comments attached.
s/Word/LibreOffice/, I do not have Windows, let alone Word. The core problem with the workflow, is that it assumes the author is only there to provide content and has no say in any other aspect of the book. As someone more used to providing press PDF this is irritating. However I could get over it, if the workflow involved a source I can put into version control. Obviously XeLaTeX is the correct medium, but AsciiDoc is acceptable as a second best.
Many publishers may allow you to provide camera-ready copies.
 Any
 suggestion of DocBook/XML as authored source is generally met with
 derision, especially given there is AsciiDoc.
You'd be surprised to hear the tooling at the Pragmatic Programmer is all XML based and quite inflexible. Our negotiations broke down over that, in spite of their really beefy financial offering.
 I have to admit, doing a Go or D book, is kind of appealing.
 Technically I am supposed to be doing "Python for Rookies, 2e" but it
 isn't happening for reasons I would rather not let the NSA know about.
Go? Urgh. As they say: Come for the concurrency, leave for everything else :o). Andrei
Feb 14 2015
parent Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce writes:
On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 10:21 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-an=
nounce wrote:
=20
[=E2=80=A6]
 Many publishers may allow you to provide camera-ready copies.
Sadly not. The big publishers (well the three I have had dealing with=20 in the last 5 years) feel they have this need to keep all their design=20 and typesetting staff employed and so enforce the "authors write with=20 Word and then we do all the page design, typesetting, etc., etc.,=20 author do not need to worry themselves over the presentation of their=20 content, we do that". The words arrogant and condescending spring to=20 mind. Also the one sub-editor in the UK who was prepared to work with LaTeX=20 source retired. All the others will only work with Word. Which of=20 course ruins the workflow with anyone using LibreOffice. Which I don't=20 except for presentation slides.
 Any
 suggestion of DocBook/XML as authored source is generally met with=20
 derision, especially given there is AsciiDoc.
=20 You'd be surprised to hear the tooling at the Pragmatic Programmer=20 is all XML based and quite inflexible. Our negotiations broke down=20 over that, in spite of their really beefy financial offering.
Hence my comment about AsciiDoc. O'Reilly and Pragmatic Programmers=20 seemed to have Git and DocBook/XML sorted, but then totally forgot=20 about author usability. AsciiDoc fixes that by being a reasonable=20 markup language that feeds into the DocBook/XML toolchain. So if I am=20 not allowed to use XeLaTeX for authoring, my only option is AsciiDoc.=20 If that is not acceptable, I don't write books.
 I have to admit, doing a Go or D book, is kind of appealing.
 Technically I am supposed to be doing "Python for Rookies, 2e" but=20
 it isn't happening for reasons I would rather not let the NSA know=20
 about.
=20 Go? Urgh. As they say: Come for the concurrency, leave for=20 everything else :o).
I think you severely mis-quote John Graham-Cummins there. But I=20 suspect by design. Go is gaining massive traction. I need income. Go is where the income=20 is. And anyway, I like Go. OK So I also like Groovy, Kotlin, Ceylon, and D. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Feb 15 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent "Stefan Koch" <uplink.coder googlemail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 16:25:30 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
wrote:
 I got an email from the publisher of my D Cookbook asking me to 
 write another book on D. From their email:

 "We have recently commissioned a book on D, titled ' Learning D 
 '. This book will have approximately 400 pages and and the 
 vision behind this book is to introduce practical concepts and 
 tasks specific to D programming."


 I had to say no; I just don't have that kind of time right now. 
 However, they asked me to ask here if anyone would be 
 interested. If you are, email me and I'll get you more 
 information and put you in contact with the Packt editors.
Thanks for the Info. I might take the bait :)
Feb 14 2015
prev sibling parent reply "Israel" <Tl12000 live.com> writes:
On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 16:25:30 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
wrote:

 "We have recently commissioned a book on D, titled ' Learning D 
 '. This book will have approximately 400 pages and and the 
 vision behind this book is to introduce practical concepts and 
 tasks specific to D programming."
That doesn't really sound like "Learning D". It sounds more like " Why D is superior"
Feb 14 2015
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/14/15 9:13 AM, Israel wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 February 2015 at 16:25:30 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 "We have recently commissioned a book on D, titled ' Learning D '.
 This book will have approximately 400 pages and and the vision behind
 this book is to introduce practical concepts and tasks specific to D
 programming."
That doesn't really sound like "Learning D". It sounds more like " Why D is superior"
Huh? Doesn't seem at all to me. "Learning furniture maintenance. This book will have approximately 400 pages and and the vision behind this book is to introduce practical concepts and tasks specific to furniture maintenance." It's a very generic characterization, even a tad too generic. If I were an acquisition editor I'd go for more eloquent phrasing ("this book" is repeated etc). Andrei
Feb 14 2015