Re:Understanding Rust futures by going way too deep
by kbenson on Monday July 26, 2021 @01:35PM
(#27962388)
> Then title it accordingly and don't dress it up in "futures" camouflage -- you're doing your readers/learners a disservice.
In their defense, the title is "Understanding Rust futures by going way too deep", and I think advice and tangents on best practices modules is easily covered by "going way too deep".
> you're doing your readers/learners a disservice.
Not every tutorial needs to be the same, cater to the same type of person, or try to explain things in the same manner. I think the bigger disservice to readers/learners would be to homogenize tutorials into what you think is best. That might work best for a certain type of person at a certain skill level, but that doesn't mean everyone will be served well by that. And as the comments here illustrate, it's not like there's a dearth of Rust futures tutorials and explanations. There's definitely room for a rambling, informal, irreverent, meandering take (it's the only thing that kept me reading until the end, or even past the first page or two).
In their defense, the title is "Understanding Rust futures by going way too deep", and I think advice and tangents on best practices modules is easily covered by "going way too deep".
> you're doing your readers/learners a disservice.
Not every tutorial needs to be the same, cater to the same type of person, or try to explain things in the same manner. I think the bigger disservice to readers/learners would be to homogenize tutorials into what you think is best. That might work best for a certain type of person at a certain skill level, but that doesn't mean everyone will be served well by that. And as the comments here illustrate, it's not like there's a dearth of Rust futures tutorials and explanations. There's definitely room for a rambling, informal, irreverent, meandering take (it's the only thing that kept me reading until the end, or even past the first page or two).