Remove "Learn Rust" from TRPL. #30595
Conversation
|
r? @brson (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
GET WRECKED @bors r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 8e2ab89 has been approved by |
|
Sad to see content like this disappear, but 👍 for the reasons. |
…ankro Some history: While getting Rust to 1.0, it was a struggle to keep the book in a working state. I had always wanted a certain kind of TOC, but couldn't quite get it there. At the 11th hour, I wrote up "Rust inside other langauges" and "Dining Philosophers" in an attempt to get the book in the direction I wanted to go. They were fine, but not my best work. I wanted to further expand this section, but it's just never going to end up happening. We're doing the second draft of the book now, and these sections are basically gone already. Here's the issues with these two sections, and removing them just fixes it all: // Philosophers There was always controversy over which ones were chosen, and why. This is kind of a perpetual bikeshed, but it comes up every once in a while. The implementation was originally supposed to show off channels, but never did, due to time constraints. Months later, I still haven't re-written it to use them. People get different results and assume that means they're wrong, rather than the non-determinism inherent in concurrency. Platform differences aggrivate this, as does the exact amount of sleeping and printing. // Rust Inside Other Languages This section is wonderful, and shows off a strength of Rust. However, it's not clear what qualifies a language to be in this section. And I'm not sure how tracking a ton of other languages is gonna work, into the future; we can't test _anything_ in this section, so it's prone to bitrot. By removing this section, and making the Guessing Game an initial tutorial, we will move this version of the book closer to the future version, and just eliminate all of these questions. In addition, this also solves the 'split-brained'-ness of having two paths, which has endlessly confused people in the past. I'm sad to see these sections go, but I think it's for the best. Fixes rust-lang#30471 Fixes rust-lang#30163 Fixes rust-lang#30162 Fixes rust-lang#25488 Fixes rust-lang#30345 Fixes rust-lang#29590 Fixes rust-lang#28713 Fixes rust-lang#28915 And probably others. This lengthy list alone is enough to show that these should have been removed. RIP.
|
@steveklabnik I don't think this closes #29590 ? |
|
@cmr ugh, i must have typo'd the number :( |
steveklabnik
force-pushed
the
remove_learn_rust
branch
from
8e2ab89 to
0c6c34d
Compare
Some history: While getting Rust to 1.0, it was a struggle to keep the book in a working state. I had always wanted a certain kind of TOC, but couldn't quite get it there. At the 11th hour, I wrote up "Rust inside other langauges" and "Dining Philosophers" in an attempt to get the book in the direction I wanted to go. They were fine, but not my best work. I wanted to further expand this section, but it's just never going to end up happening. We're doing the second draft of the book now, and these sections are basically gone already. Here's the issues with these two sections, and removing them just fixes it all: // Philosophers There was always controversy over which ones were chosen, and why. This is kind of a perpetual bikeshed, but it comes up every once in a while. The implementation was originally supposed to show off channels, but never did, due to time constraints. Months later, I still haven't re-written it to use them. People get different results and assume that means they're wrong, rather than the non-determinism inherent in concurrency. Platform differences aggrivate this, as does the exact amount of sleeping and printing. // Rust Inside Other Languages This section is wonderful, and shows off a strength of Rust. However, it's not clear what qualifies a language to be in this section. And I'm not sure how tracking a ton of other languages is gonna work, into the future; we can't test _anything_ in this section, so it's prone to bitrot. By removing this section, and making the Guessing Game an initial tutorial, we will move this version of the book closer to the future version, and just eliminate all of these questions. In addition, this also solves the 'split-brained'-ness of having two paths, which has endlessly confused people in the past. I'm sad to see these sections go, but I think it's for the best. Fixes rust-lang#30471 Fixes rust-lang#30163 Fixes rust-lang#30162 Fixes rust-lang#25488 Fixes rust-lang#30345 Fixes rust-lang#28713 Fixes rust-lang#28915 And probably others. This lengthy list alone is enough to show that these should have been removed. RIP.
|
@steveklabnik any chance you'll republish these elsewhere? The Dining Philosophers implementation hurt my head, and I can't disagree with the decision here, but it ultimately hurt my head in a good way and it helped me think about concurrency issues not only in Rust but in general in a helpful way. I'd hate to see it just vanish into the æther. |
|
Yeah I will republish on my blog and link here 👍 On Jan 2, 2016, 15:38 -0500, Chris Krychonotifications@github.com, wrote:
|
Steve, this is stealing intellectual property from the Rust project. I cannot in good conscience allow this, and will be contacting Mozilla's legal department should you attempt to go any further. Cease and desist. Regards, Alexis |
|
@gankro: the book content presently falls under the MIT or Apache license, as the user prefers. Both allow for someone to republish any part of the software, including its documentation, as long as they cite the original source and include the license. (Should tutorial/book content, like the artwork, should be under CCByAt instead?) Edit: sigh I see I just got trolled. |
all the way down.
|
@bors: r=gankro rollup |
|
📌 Commit 0c6c34d has been approved by |
Some history: While getting Rust to 1.0, it was a struggle to keep the book in a working state. I had always wanted a certain kind of TOC, but couldn't quite get it there. At the 11th hour, I wrote up "Rust inside other langauges" and "Dining Philosophers" in an attempt to get the book in the direction I wanted to go. They were fine, but not my best work. I wanted to further expand this section, but it's just never going to end up happening. We're doing the second draft of the book now, and these sections are basically gone already. Here's the issues with these two sections, and removing them just fixes it all: // Philosophers There was always controversy over which ones were chosen, and why. This is kind of a perpetual bikeshed, but it comes up every once in a while. The implementation was originally supposed to show off channels, but never did, due to time constraints. Months later, I still haven't re-written it to use them. People get different results and assume that means they're wrong, rather than the non-determinism inherent in concurrency. Platform differences aggrivate this, as does the exact amount of sleeping and printing. // Rust Inside Other Languages This section is wonderful, and shows off a strength of Rust. However, it's not clear what qualifies a language to be in this section. And I'm not sure how tracking a ton of other languages is gonna work, into the future; we can't test _anything_ in this section, so it's prone to bitrot. By removing this section, and making the Guessing Game an initial tutorial, we will move this version of the book closer to the future version, and just eliminate all of these questions. In addition, this also solves the 'split-brained'-ness of having two paths, which has endlessly confused people in the past. I'm sad to see these sections go, but I think it's for the best. Fixes #30471 Fixes #30163 Fixes #30162 Fixes #25488 Fixes #30345 Fixes #29590 Fixes #28713 Fixes #28915 And probably others. This lengthy list alone is enough to show that these should have been removed. RIP.
|
Wow, apparently i typod a bunch of issue numbers :( Thanks @ollie27 re-opened. |
It was removed in rust-lang#30595. Also delete the old learn-rust.md.
Some history:
While getting Rust to 1.0, it was a struggle to keep the book in a
working state. I had always wanted a certain kind of TOC, but couldn't
quite get it there.
At the 11th hour, I wrote up "Rust inside other langauges" and "Dining
Philosophers" in an attempt to get the book in the direction I wanted to
go. They were fine, but not my best work. I wanted to further expand
this section, but it's just never going to end up happening. We're doing
the second draft of the book now, and these sections are basically gone
already.
Here's the issues with these two sections, and removing them just fixes
it all:
// Philosophers
There was always controversy over which ones were chosen, and why. This
is kind of a perpetual bikeshed, but it comes up every once in a while.
The implementation was originally supposed to show off channels, but
never did, due to time constraints. Months later, I still haven't
re-written it to use them.
People get different results and assume that means they're wrong, rather
than the non-determinism inherent in concurrency. Platform differences
aggrivate this, as does the exact amount of sleeping and printing.
// Rust Inside Other Languages
This section is wonderful, and shows off a strength of Rust. However,
it's not clear what qualifies a language to be in this section. And I'm
not sure how tracking a ton of other languages is gonna work, into the
future; we can't test anything in this section, so it's prone to
bitrot.
By removing this section, and making the Guessing Game an initial
tutorial, we will move this version of the book closer to the future
version, and just eliminate all of these questions.
In addition, this also solves the 'split-brained'-ness of having two
paths, which has endlessly confused people in the past.
I'm sad to see these sections go, but I think it's for the best.
Fixes #30471
Fixes #30163
Fixes #30162
Fixes #25488
Fixes #30345
Fixes #29590
Fixes #28713
Fixes #28915
And probably others. This lengthy list alone is enough to show that
these should have been removed.
RIP.