This weekend I read most of the Rust book without much effort and found it really helpful for getting up to speed with the language, especially the more novel bits around safety. It took me to the point where I was able to explore and evaluate the bits of the language I needed with only library docs. I know that the remaining chapters are there for when I am ready for them.

My experience with the Rust book as made me more likely to consider starting with a book when approaching programming languages in the future.

Reading other comments, I recognize that I was fortunate to have a project in mind that motivated my reading of the book and just happened to be an excellent fit for Rust.

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).

I think the new book is far, far, far better, but I can understand why some other folks don't agree.

Yes, is may not really fit in the book but then there should be a official place for this. Preferably with different OSes and IDEs covered.

But like I said the book may not be the right place for this but there MUST be a place for this and if not then such a place must be created. Many many other languages/frameworks etc. have the same problem.

Well done!

I started off reading your book, and I found it really helpful, even though I didn't make it all the way through. I feel like there are a lot of resources cropping up that are good supplemental material (the "half hour to learn Rust" blog post linked in this document being one of those) which can quickly get people up to speed, but the details in the book are still valuable.

Reading through (most of) the book was really helpful when I went to Exercism (another fine resource recommended by the post linked here), and I still use it as a reference when I am fuzzy on a concept.

I think the hard part of just reading the book is that unless you have some problem you’re trying to solve, it’s hard to get motivated to read it.

It’d be nice if there was a book that’s a bit less dry —- something like Learn You A Haskell or Why’s poignant guide to Ruby.

Thanks for writing it!