Interesting. Had you actually done any of the Elixir track, or just looked at it? The concept introductions appear in the editor and in the CLI Readmes, but not on that specific page. However, I imagine someone could try to work locally using the website (not the README) as a reference and thus miss that altogether. Interested in whether that was your experience.
Maybe we could organise a group call with people who want to contribute at some time this week to get everyone on the same page. Possibly Thursday or Friday? Is there appetite for that?
I’ve updated your Trust Level so you should be able to post more now
Thank you so much for this
I suggest waiting for @ErikSchierboom to comment on at least one of these before doing more, just to ensure there’s nothing fundamental that will need doing differently across the others (thus causing more work for you).
Then I think all having a session where we agree the strategy to get this over the line feels wise. There’s a lot of great enthusiasm and effort here, and I want to make sure we channel it to get the best outcome! I’ll speak to Erik when he’s working tomorrow and we’ll come up with a plan!
Yes, that was exactly my experience. I’ve done 20 exercises, covering 19 concepts. Missed all of the explanations completely!
Maybe not reading the README is a bad habit I picked up from mostly solving Rust exercises when starting out on Exercism, for which I don’t need much explanation.
Thank you for suggesting this! I’m actually concerned that trying to work asynchronously on this could lead to problems.
I should be able to make time mostly, expect Friday afternoon. I’ll be blocked between about 13:00-17:00 UTC.
Wow. Ok. Yeah - that sucks! We’ll fix that!
…Oh. I hadn’t noticed, but this has also been my experience.
I do not expect much ‘material’ productivity on my end, but if I’m welcome I’d gladly listen in.
We could try a strawpoll to decide a time & meet in the General channel on discord.
I made one to try out the service Discuss Rust Track Maintenance - Online Poll - StrawPoll.com
Unless there is already an established method?
@iHiD Maybe I missed some interesting or even important points of this discussion. I tried to follow since I’m on my way contribute my first stuff to Go. I was in touch with Franziska especially regarding the concurrency topic and around. I started with doing exercises by my own and did a lot of mentoring, to get a better feeling of Exercism itself. Now it’s time to bring such nice missing concepts to the Go track.
I was wondering - when you mentioned a call here - if it is for the specific Rust discussion, or contribution and / or concepts in general. If the latter, I would be interested, too.
This would be my M.O. as well. Code locally, and use the website as a reference, as it is nicer to look at the formatted markdown there. I think I read all the info though as I use exercise like a computer game. Completionist style - look at everything.
Happy to put together a call around contribution/concepts. Would be happy to dedicate one of the Friday calls to that (maybe this weeks?). But I’d like to have one specifically around Rust for the discussion here
I’ll try and look at some of the PRs today or tomorrow!
I’ve looked at a couple of them and it’s a great start!
The community call was interesting, I really enjoyed it throughout. But I still don’t know: How is the work on the Rust track going to be organized?
I feel like what we have so far is the opposite of what was discussed in the community call. There are 10 PRs which have not been prepared collaboratively on the forum at all.
I am confused.
As I understood it, Jeremy (and the rest at Exercism) were applauding people having conversation in this thread instead of shouting “it’s mine” and then becoming entrenched / getting stuck.
The way forward for this track is to have the PRs merged first, and continue with the basic blocks being built. Then, or in parallel, a few special rust exercises (concept) should be crafted, around very rusty topics such as the borrower.
Finally, when it all comes together, the idea is that Katrina / Erik / Jeremy / a multitude of people will sit with y’all to connect all the parts up from the syllabus (aka unlocking order, etc.).
@iHiD feel free to correct me
are we deciding to discuss particular exercises/concepts here or is there somewhere else?
I would like to suggest that the Anagrams exercise be a great place to discuss the Rust elision rules and lifetimes. The current readme only talks about different types of sorts and the stub methods provided do not compile until the lifetime parameter for the possible anagrams vector is synchronized with the return hashset.
I needed a mentor session to solve and a pointer to the Book section on the elision rules
Give me a day or two to get back to y’all on this. What @SleeplessByte said is pretty much spot on. I just need to chat with Katrina and Erik and agree a plan for how we want to move forward in the short term.
Right. I’m excited for this. Here’s a starting point: [Rust Syllabus] Overview + Tracking
I’m also going to arrange a call for us the week after next where we can discuss things as a group! But in the meantime, there’s a first step for everyone on there, and we can discuss an exercise or two too hopefully as well.