new gemlog post:
comparing language documentation


· · Web · 2 · 0 · 1

@nytpu I like how you go: "Bah, I got lazy and I don't know why my point is. Oh, wait, Rust sucks!" 😂 👍

@nytpu I like the principles but, as someone who uses the Rust docs, I take exception to the 3/10 score.

Once you understand Rust, the reference documentation is easily browsable and understandable - especially std. The language itself is complex, but the docs work well once you learn it.

I also would rate the lynx-ability as a simple "no" - the main issue is the mess at the top, but below "1.0.0[-][src]..." Is the normal docs. So it's possible once you scroll down.

(I also take exception to the claim that the reference implementation is hard to read, since I reference it sometimes with ease - as a Rust newbie. But that's more subjective.)

@mikeburns yeah, i went pretty hard on rust to the point of unreasonability. every so often i'll see an amazing c library that was abandoned 3 years ago and was rewritten in rust, and then i get very very angry and go rant about rust wherever i can

@mikeburns the thing with a c library is that you can link it into practically any language you want: python, go, scheme, perl, hell, even rust. but with a rust library, you have to use rust and you're sol on using your own language.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

masto instance for the tildeverse