←back to thread

Open-source Zig book

(www.zigbook.net)
692 points rudedogg | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.578s | source
Show context
mendelmaleh ◴[] No.45948849[source]
> 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 think it's time to have a badge for non LLM content, and avoid the rest.

replies(8): >>45948872 #>>45949081 #>>45949082 #>>45949278 #>>45949330 #>>45949672 #>>45949992 #>>45951025 #
James_K ◴[] No.45949672[source]
> Most programming languages hide complexity from you—they abstract away memory management, mask control flow with implicit operations, and shield you from the machine beneath. This feels simple at first, but eventually you hit a wall. You need to understand why something is slow, where a crash happened, or how to squeeze every ounce of performance from your hardware. Suddenly, the abstractions that helped you get started are now in your way.

> Zig takes a different path. It reveals complexity—and then gives you the tools to master it.

> This book will take you from Hello, world! to building systems that cross-compile to any platform, manage memory with surgical precision, and generate code at compile time. You will learn not just how Zig works, but why it works the way it does. Every allocation will be explicit. Every control path will be visible. Every abstraction will be precise, not vague.

But sadly people like the prompter of this book will lie and pretend to have written things themselves that they did not. First three paragraphs by the way, and a bingo for every sign of AI.

replies(3): >>45949699 #>>45950097 #>>45951051 #
mef51 ◴[] No.45949699[source]
The em dashes?
replies(2): >>45949748 #>>45950318 #
1. James_K ◴[] No.45949748[source]
There's also the classic “it's not just X, it's Y”, adjective overuse, rule of 3, total nonsense (manage memory with surgical precision? what does that mean?), etc. One of these is excusable, but text entirely comprised of AI indicators is either deliberately written to mimic AI style, or the product of AI.
replies(2): >>45949820 #>>45950234 #
2. osigurdson ◴[] No.45949820[source]
"not just x but y" is definitely a tell tale AI marker. But, people can write that as well. Also our writing styles can be influenced as we've seen so much AI content.

Anyway, if someone says they didn't use AI, I would personally give them the benefit of the doubt for a while at least.

3. ants_everywhere ◴[] No.45950234[source]
this construction is familiar to anyone who has taken a course on writing post middle or high school.

The formal version is "not only... but also" https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/..., which I personally use regularly but I often write formally even in informal settings.

"not just... but" is just the less formal version.

Google ngrams shows the "not just ... but" construction has a sharp increase starting in 2000. https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=not+just+*+but...

Same with "not only ... but also" https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=not+only+*+but...

Like many scholarly linguistic construction, this is one many of us saw in latin class with non solum ... sed etium or non modo ... sed etium: https://issuu.com/uteplib/docs/latin_grammar/234. I didn't take ancient Greek, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's also a version there.

More info

- https://www.phrasemix.com/phrases/not-just-something-but-som...

- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/not%20just

- https://www.grammarly.com/blog/writing-techniques/parallelis...

- https://www.crockford.com/style.html

- https://englishan.com/correlative-conjunctions-definition-ru...