On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 7:46 AM, spir <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm exploring the tutorial "Rust for Rubyists" at > [http://www.rustforrubyists.com/book/book.html], which in fact is not (only) > for rubyists, as stated in the introduction. Looks pretty good to me (just > my opinion), should definitely be pointed to from the Rust Docs page at > [https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Docs], and in good place. As a > tutorial, it is in my view far better than the "official" one, and is > up-to-date (Rust 0.8), so maybe even just replace it; with a warning note. > > The "official" tutorial is not a bad doc in itself (I guess) but is > definitely not a _tutorial_: in fact, it requires quite a knowledge of Rust, > its fundamental concepts and jargon. "Rust for Rubyists" certainly has room > for improvement, but it _is_ for sure a tutorial. I would definitely suggest > to start writing a new official tutorial by using "Rust for Rubyists" as raw > material. A first pass may be to make it slightly more general, just > requiring prior programming experience; Rust definitely is not a language > for programming novices, anyway. > > Denis
The tutorial is currently quite flawed and has ended up being a list of language features with overviews and low quality examples. Parts of it are approaching the right level of information, but it's not written in the style expected of a tutorial. I think it's very important to cover the core language features like boxes and references at a high level. The unique and least approachable features need great introductory coverage. I recently replaced the old sections on owned boxes, vectors and strings, so any concrete feedback on those would be helpful. _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
