> Reading the documentation?

Yes?

> I really want to look at the code and be able to know straight away what it does, or have a rough idea.

You said elsewhere that you love Perl. Would you say your sentence above applies to Perl?

It does not, but Perl is a much older language, and I have familiarized myself with it through actual discourses regarding its syntax, implementation details, and so forth. But in this thread? All I got was wrongful accusations and down-votes. I am done replying to this thread. Should have just let Walter reply, but that was not enough for you people, was it?

Funny though, because most of the things these people accuse me of are dead wrong, and my comment history is proof of that. In fact, I have been down-voted to oblivion for telling people to read the documentation. I guess we may have come full circle.

Glad we had this utterly pointless chat.

▲

spacechild1 a day ago | parent [-]

I'm not a D user and I don't have a ball in this game. I just found your critique of D's syntax rather odd because it can be applied to basically any language one is not already familiar with. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think my response was particularly rude...

	▲	johnisgood 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I mean, to me it just looks ugly. Perhaps written in a different way, it would have been better. I have seen Haskell and Elixir code, but they were much less ugly. Then again, it is entirely subjective, and we should not argue about taste. To each their own.