In article <bcoqoc$2nol$1@digitaldaemon.com>, New comer says...
>Which is the closest in structure , syntext and logic ? What I understand , to
>start with C/C++ is
>out of the question. Correct ?

Throwing C and C++ into the same pot would be wrong here. And though i have said that C is unusable, i didnt mean it being unlearnable. :)

It is suggested that you learn ObjectPascal or Java, which would give you the programming skills, and understanding of Object-Oriented concepts. "Thinking in Java" by Bruce Eckel comes to mind, and is freely available on his site. Although i haven't read this book, i read some others of him and i consider him the best programming book writer i ever came across. He would not only teach you the language, but so much more.

What i meant, you shouldn't try to start doing any large project in C - since what appears to be simple and straightforward in almost any language, would give you tons of possibilities to make bugs in C. But i believe learning C wasn't useless since it gave me a good understanding of Pointers which i didn't have after learning Pascal. So, you may start with C if you like, then pass on to object-oriented languages.

I wouldn't recommend learning C++ -- it would give you nothing if you want to program in D. It may burn your brain since it's conceptually too impure. Java and ObjectPascal are really much closer to D. Syntactically, Java, C and D belong to the same family (american, AT&T), and Pascal is diferent (Wirth school) - but Pascal syntax has never damaged anyone's brain yet, as opposed to that of C. :>

So the path i would recommend could be Java/OPascal -> C -> D.

-i.

> I'm strictly opposed to the idea of learning C++
> as the first object-oriented language, and i believe that Pascal is much
> better suited than e.g. Java.

C++ is not an object-oriented language. It staggers me to hear people characterise it as such. It is, in fact, a language that supports object-orientation as one of several paradigms supported.

> That means you have to learn C, but not that you have to learn C++. I would recommend starting off with Delphi, Java or C#.
>

Agreed. I know nothing of Delphi. Of the other two, C# is probably the better one, because it allows pointers and platform-dependent code to pollute its language/libraries, and since D will always do the same, it might be the more realistic introduction.

> Which is the closest in structure , syntext and logic ? What I understand
, to
> start with C/C++ is
> out of the question. Correct ?

I'd suggest C + C#, or C + Java, then you get two completely different slants. Since D will, in part, be a multi-paradigm language it seems to me that if one wants to be a proficient D user, then it is wise not to get mentally bogged down into one paradigmic rut, which any of those languages alone will certainly do to you.

Actually, here's a thought. Why not learn Python. It supports procedural and object-oriented programming, is much simpler to learn than any of the others, and one can get a first Python program doing interesting things in just a few hours.