On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Daniel Glazman <[email protected]> wrote: > The Tutorial is the entry point for all people willing to investigate > Rust and/or contribute to Servo. I think that document is super > precious, super-important. Unfortunately, I don't think it is really a > tutorial but only a lighter manual. Examples are here even more > important than in the case of the Manual above. A good Tutorial is > often built around one single programming task that becomes more and > more complex as more features of the language are read and > known. Furthermore, the Tutorial has clearly adopted the language > complexity of the reference manual, something that I think should be > in general avoided. I also think all examples should be buildable > and produce a readable result on the console even if that result is a > build or execution error. That would drastically help the reader. > > All in all, I think the Tutorial needs some love and probably a > technical writer who is not working on the guts of Rust, someone who > could vulgarize the notions of the Manual into an easy-to-read, > simple-to-experiment, step-by-step tutorial and avoiding in general > vocabulary inherited from programming language science. >
I agree, partially. I think "Rust for Rubyists" fills this role quite well for now. Generally I think the language tutorial should not try to hide complexity or paper over things, at the very least so it can be complete and correct. I think the Python tutorial is a good benchmark. We might even be able to rip off the Python tutorial's structure wholesale. The "on-boarding" process is still very rough. Maybe some sort of live-comment system would work well for finding pain points, where one can add comments/feedback while reading the tutorial. _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
