On Friday, 12 May 2017 at 21:26:01 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
> On Friday, 12 May 2017 at 15:24:52 UTC, k-five wrote:
>> A full version that I just added to my gitgub: https://github.com/k-five/dren
>
> You may like getopt[1] for command line argument parsing.
>
> https://dlang.org/phobos/std_getopt.html

see also
https://blog.thecybershadow.net/2014/08/05/ae-utils-funopt/
https://github.com/CyberShadow/ae/blob/master/utils/funopt.d

On Friday, 12 May 2017 at 20:53:56 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:

> Is it safe to say that these 40 lines of D do the same as your 324 lines of C++ [1]?

No. I cannot say that.
Since this is not a full port of renrem in C++ to D. It was just an example in D, nothing else.

> This, and your comments on the difficulties of building renrem [2] versus doing "rdmd", and the steepness of the learning curve (1 year C++ vs 2 weeks D), and the productivity (2 hours D vs ?? C++)

I am not sure about understanding your purpose correctly.

> I think are plenty material for a nice little blog.

Which English Grammar rule is used here? Sorry but I do not know!
are: linking verb after
think: main verb and subject!
-------------------------------------------------------
I just want to say D is easy to learn and use; that is it. I have no arguing about which Language is better no not. Of course that program with C++, took me 1 month until it got ready, but in 2 days I could ported to D, since I had the already experience of implementing it.


> Mike Parker runs the D blog, and I think he might be interested. No need to worry about the english language, you are safe with Mike. I'll see if I can get you his attention.

Sorry ... Still could not understand ... except you may want me to put such post in D blog not here, and in this case, your are right, the best way for such examples is on a blog or similar. Sorry for posting it here.

On Saturday, 13 May 2017 at 08:23:55 UTC, k-five wrote:
> On Friday, 12 May 2017 at 20:53:56 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
>
>> Is it safe to say that these 40 lines of D do the same as your 324 lines of C++ [1]?
>
> No. I cannot say that.
> Since this is not a full port of renrem in C++ to D. It was just an example in D, nothing else.

OK understood.

>> This, and your comments on the difficulties of building renrem [2] versus doing "rdmd", and the steepness of the learning curve (1 year C++ vs 2 weeks D), and the productivity (2 hours D vs ?? C++)
>
> I am not sure about understanding your purpose correctly.
>
>> I think are plenty material for a nice little blog.
>
> Which English Grammar rule is used here? Sorry but I do not know!
> are: linking verb after
> think: main verb and subject!

I am sorry for expressing myself poorly. What I meant to say is that it looked like you can write an interesting article about your experience learning and using C++ and learning and using D, comparing the two. D could come out of that comparison favourably considering 1) how long it takes to learn, 2) how much code you need to write, 3) whether there are difficulties along the way, and 4) how productive you can be (getting things done). I may have been jumping to conclusions, but it could still be an interesting read, especially for people that consider learning C++ or D. In particular the focus on UFCS is interesting, as that can be rather alien to beginners, and something you are enthusiastic about.

> I just want to say D is easy to learn and use; that is it. I have no arguing about which Language is better no not. Of course that program with C++, took me 1 month until it got ready, but in 2 days I could ported to D, since I had the already experience of implementing it.

Understood.

>> Mike Parker runs the D blog, and I think he might be interested. No need to worry about the english language, you are safe with Mike. I'll see if I can get you his attention.
>
> Sorry ... Still could not understand ... except you may want me to put such post in D blog not here, and in this case, your are right, the best way for such examples is on a blog or similar. Sorry for posting it here.

Posting it here is fine. You could also have posted in the general forum, as it is more of a compliment than a question. But if you want to write more about your positive experience, then a blog article might be nice. It would reach more people, and it would maybe help some of them. If you want to do that work, then maybe Mike Parker would want to put it on the D blog, and help you polish it.

Whatever you decide to do, thanks for sharing your experience here :-)

Bastiaan.

On Saturday, 13 May 2017 at 10:15:34 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
> On Saturday, 13 May 2017 at 08:23:55 UTC, k-five wrote:
>> [...]
>
> OK understood.
>
>> [...]
>
> I am sorry for expressing myself poorly. What I meant to say is that it looked like you can write an interesting article about your experience learning and using C++ and learning and using D, comparing the two. D could come out of that comparison favourably considering 1) how long it takes to learn, 2) how much code you need to write, 3) whether there are difficulties along the way, and 4) how productive you can be (getting things done). I may have been jumping to conclusions, but it could still be an interesting read, especially for people that consider learning C++ or D. In particular the focus on UFCS is interesting, as that can be rather alien to beginners, and something you are enthusiastic about.
>
>> [...]
>
> Understood.
>
>> [...]
>
> Posting it here is fine. You could also have posted in the general forum, as it is more of a compliment than a question. But if you want to write more about your positive experience, then a blog article might be nice. It would reach more people, and it would maybe help some of them. If you want to do that work, then maybe Mike Parker would want to put it on the D blog, and help you polish it.
>
> Whatever you decide to do, thanks for sharing your experience here :-)
>
> Bastiaan.

On Saturday, 13 May 2017 at 10:15:34 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:

--------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, and NOW I understood what you are trying to say.
First of all I thought you got mad at me. And I became sad. Since; I tell this really that I was so happy about the code in D, that I would want to share my happiness here with others and not expressing myself. Still I am a beginner and learner.
Thanks anyway.

On Saturday, 13 May 2017 at 10:51:09 UTC, k-five wrote:
> Okay, and NOW I understood what you are trying to say.
> First of all I thought you got mad at me. And I became sad.

My sincere apologies! Always assume the best in people :-) I am glad you asked for clarification.

> [...] Still I am a beginner and learner.

I am too, and learners we are all.

> Thanks anyway.

Welcome.