4 ms·
To be fair, when I first saw this advice to read the book first, the book was this one: https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.30.0/book/first-edition/ https://doc.rust-la
by cesarb 6y ago
To be fair, when I first saw this advice to read the book first, the book was this one: https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.30.0/book/first-edition/ https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.30.0/book/first-edition/ which is much shorter.
That is, the advice "the best way to learn Rust is to read the book" came from when the book was a different one; it's still repeated (perhaps by people who learned from the old book), but it might no longer be as valid.
Just for fun, I've been re-reading the book (that is: reading the new book), and it's much more tiring than I remember the old book being (but I've learned a new trick or two, things that didn't exist back in the Rust 1.0 days when I first learned through reading the book).
- steveklabnik 6y agoYeah. I think it comes down to style. The new book is almost exactly twice as long as the old one; the old one had less stuff to explain, and also didn't explain it in as much depth. Some people prefer brevity. Some prefer the extra explanation. It's a constant struggle to keep the book from getting even longer. I think the new book is far, far, far better, but I can understand why some other folks don't agree.
- _bxg1 6y agoI think personally I like it when things go in "layers". Start with a shallow pass, and then do one or more passes of increasing depth