Hi, I have a few simple questions about D.

First off, why is it that if i run 'mydprogram one_arg', args.length equals 2? Something i'm missing? seems like just one argument was passed. Does the name as the program count as an argument?

Second off, in C arrays are declared in the order of

short bob[numarrays:2][num_vars_per_array:3] =
{
{1,2,3},
{1,2,3}
};

why does D take such a different approach with

short [num_vars_per_array:3][numarrays:2] =
[
[1,2,3],
[1,2,3]
];

Is there something really useful i'm missing here? It seems like it just makes it harder to convert C++ code to D, and as a c/c++ guy it is just confusing.

"Claydoo" <Claydoo_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:c7gp9d$1ch8$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Hi, I have a few simple questions about D.
>
> First off, why is it that if i run 'mydprogram one_arg', args.length
equals 2?
> Something i'm missing? seems like just one argument was passed. Does the
name as
> the program count as an argument?

That's correct, args[0] is the program name used.


>
> Second off, in C arrays are declared in the order of
>
> short bob[numarrays:2][num_vars_per_array:3] =
> {
> {1,2,3},
> {1,2,3}
> };
>
> why does D take such a different approach with
>
> short [num_vars_per_array:3][numarrays:2] =
> [
> [1,2,3],
> [1,2,3]
> ];
>
> Is there something really useful i'm missing here? It seems like it just
makes
> it harder to convert C++ code to D, and as a c/c++ guy it is just
confusing.

D's way makes it easier to parse. Encounter [], it's an array; {}, it's a struct.


--
Christopher E. Miller

Vathix wrote:

>>short bob[numarrays:2][num_vars_per_array:3] =

>>short [num_vars_per_array:3][numarrays:2] =
(should be short [num_vars_per_array:3][numarrays:2] *bob* =, no?)

> D's way makes it easier to parse. Encounter [], it's an array; {}, it's a
> struct.

I read it as wondering why the order is changed... I have no answer for that, however, but I assume there's likely a reason.

-[Unknown]

On Fri, 7 May 2004 15:56:40 -0400, "Vathix" <vathixSpamFix@dprogramming.com> wrote:

>"Claydoo" <Claydoo_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:c7gp9d$1ch8$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> Hi, I have a few simple questions about D.
>
>>
>> Second off, in C arrays are declared in the order of
>>
>> short bob[numarrays:2][num_vars_per_array:3] =
>> {
>> {1,2,3},
>> {1,2,3}
>> };
>>
>> why does D take such a different approach with
>>
>> short [num_vars_per_array:3][numarrays:2] =
>> [
>> [1,2,3],
>> [1,2,3]
>> ];
>>
>> Is there something really useful i'm missing here? It seems like it just
>makes
>> it harder to convert C++ code to D, and as a c/c++ guy it is just
>confusing.
>
consider the C
typedef int IA[4]
typedef IA myData[3]

IA is int[4]
myData is (int[4])[3]
or int myData[3][4] <- more confusing if its more complex as in :
 int[][char[]][] is array of ( assoc(key=char[], value=int[])  )
something[] where something is val[key] with val=int[], key=char[]
simple to mix arrays of arrays of hashes od arrays of hashes of ......

may seem odd if you come from a C background, but once you use it you'll never look back.

Mike.