You can criticise rust for a lot of things but bad learning materials I don't think can be one of them. The sheer amount of high quality learning materials is one of the selling points for the language. It was one of the areas targeted strongly to get an easy on-ramp to drive adoption.

I haven't looked for this kind of resource before but I found one that looks very high quality and up to date in less than a minute. https://github.com/nrc/r4cppp

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

I didn’t say they were bad. I was pointing out that:

Blaming a user for not hitting the same results on search engines is a flawed argument; my search did not present the book that was linked in the original comment, even while using the title of the book as the search phrase. It instead was a mix of forums, social media, and YouTube tutorials, all of which do not have the same depth as a good book.
The material presented in some of the “Rust for C++ programmers” videos and posts focused more on direct translation of syntax. This is good “first step” material to make the user more comfortable, but again they didn’t cover the common pitfalls that a C++ developer will encounter when they’re still approaching Rust with a C++ mindset.

That said, the guide you’ve shared was in fact on the first page of my results, and is definitely a good example of the type of content that is available. What I think should take place is a compilation of similar guides and books to be posted either in the Rust forums as a pin or a YouTube playlist in the official channel, perhaps even with a small list of suggested crates to review the source code of as pristine examples.