@terpstra There are already several resources for C++ programmers interested in Rust:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (older), 7, that’s compared to ie someone coming from Haskell, which only this that I could find.
Anyway, I would echo what @Toby_S and @skade already said.
My own view on this is that if you’re already familiar with C++ then read only the parts that you’re not familiar with and skim over the others.
Why do you think that the book should be tailored towards one’s individual needs?
Rust is already being used by a wide variety of programmes including those who have previous experience with system, web, functional programming or even just shell scripting.
Maybe this expectation comes from the fact that Rust markets itself as “a systems programming language” and I understand where one can come to have such an expectation from people learning Rust as you have, but I would like to think that in order to learn a systems programming language, one doesn’t need to know yet another systems programming language.
Think 20 years ago, how would you feel if you wished to learn C++ and the requirement for it was that you first had to master assembly?
Don’t you think that this served to the benefit rather than to the detriment of those languages?
I think that Rust is a language strong enough to stand on its own merit, without being bogged down by the legacy of its predecessors.
Besides, Rust builds on much more than just C++, it takes ideas from Cyclone, OCaml, Haskell, Scala, Ruby, Python, Erlang and many others - shouldn’t members of all those communities feel that the documentation should be tailored more towards them?
I think that it is easy to see how it is an impossible task to please everyone 100% of the time, so the book tries to be as inclusive as possible.
I would much rather have information in the book, which can be skipped, rather than not have the info there at all - someone may need it.
Also @steveklabnik has been with Rust for a long time and has always been very willing to make any sensible changes to the documentation, attacking his background as a Rubyist as @sinistersnare has done is apart from being rude and unfair, as Steve has written the very first book that got many people even interested in Rust and has involved in the language since its very early stages as a public project, as such I can assure you that he knows what he is talking about.
I am glad for everybody who’s trying to improve Rust one way or another as we all just want the best product possible, just please take into account that there is a wide variety of people interested in Rust and taking the view that the documentation should be tailored towards your individual background is somewhat exclusive.