←back to thread

Open-source Zig book

(www.zigbook.net)
692 points rudedogg | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
jasonjmcghee ◴[] No.45948044[source]
So despite this...

> The Zigbook intentionally contains no AI-generated content—it is hand-written, carefully curated, and continuously updated to reflect the latest language features and best practices.

I just don't buy it. I'm 99% sure this is written by an LLM.

Can the author... Convince me otherwise?

> This journey begins with simplicity—the kind you encounter on the first day. By the end, you will discover a different kind of simplicity: the kind you earn by climbing through complexity and emerging with complete understanding on the other side.

> Welcome to the Zigbook. Your transformation starts now.

...

> You will know where every byte lives in memory, when the compiler executes your code, and what machine instructions your abstractions compile to. No hidden allocations. No mystery overhead. No surprises.

...

> This is not about memorizing syntax. This is about earning mastery.

replies(13): >>45948094 #>>45948100 #>>45948115 #>>45948220 #>>45948287 #>>45948327 #>>45948344 #>>45948548 #>>45948590 #>>45949076 #>>45949124 #>>45950417 #>>45951487 #
Rochus ◴[] No.45948100[source]
Who cares?

Still better than just nagging.

replies(2): >>45948284 #>>45950274 #
maxbond ◴[] No.45948284[source]
Using AI to write is one thing, claiming you didn't when you did should be objectionable to everyone.
replies(2): >>45948310 #>>45948398 #
Rochus ◴[] No.45948310[source]
Who wants to be so petty.

I'm sure there are more interesting things to say about this book.

replies(1): >>45948345 #
maxbond ◴[] No.45948345{3}[source]
So petty as to lie about using AI or so petty as to call it out? Calling it out doesn't seem petty to me.

I intend to learn Zig when it reaches 1.0 so I was interested in this book. Now that I see it was probably generated by someone who claimed otherwise, I suspect this book would have as much of a chance of hurting my understanding as helping it. So I'll skip it. Does that really sound petty?

replies(2): >>45948434 #>>45948497 #
1. ◴[] No.45948434{4}[source]